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.
So we can throw out all the bible stories can we (or whatever ancient texts you subscribe to) ...because we weren't there to know whether they were true or not?
exactly so it takes faith for both beleif's-whether we are eternal spiritual beings or just temporary material body's and since most of these theory's come from people who have no clue about spiritual nature then why should i beleive what they beleive happened-i'd rather listen to a self realized soul who knows fully well that God exist's and most importantly has put into practice the principles/philosophy/action's of a pure devotee and has made his life succsesfull-you cant argue with the results that this can bring-for instance the chanting of the holy names-bring's immediate effects,after all God's name is holy and Krishna says that all his pleasure potency is in His name-and you cant manufacture a mantra it just wouldnt work-its a spirityual thing-and it work's-........the proof of the pudding is in the eating!
lifertexan qouted me on saying it was silly that a bacteria could evolve into a cat but thats exactly what evolution suggest's that all life hasevolv ed from single celled organism's -what kind of logic is that-what a bacteria cant evolve into a cat but the rest of life can-you tell me-since your on his side on this argument
I quoted you because you seemed to have the idea that there was a short evolutionary leap from a bacteria to a cat,as if bacteria starting sprouting fur and claws to become a cat.Why am I to suppose you actually understand the interminably slow,prodding progress from bacteria to mammal?Nothing you have posted suggests that you do.
All this begs the question.Have you actually learned and understood what you oppose,or do you just oppose it because someone has convinced you that it is theologically wrong to accept evolution?This is not intended as a slight,it is a sincere question.You seem not to really understand the scientific principles involved here,which leads to the obvious question of how you can be opposed to what you don't even understand?
I quoted you because you seemed to have the idea that there was a short evolutionary leap from a bacteria to a cat,as if bacteria starting sprouting fur and claws to become a cat.Why am I to suppose you actually understand the interminably slow,prodding progress from bacteria to mammal?Nothing you have posted suggests that you do.
All this begs the question.Have you actually learned and understood what you oppose,or do you just oppose it because someone has convinced you that it is theologically wrong to accept evolution?This is not intended as a slight,it is a sincere question.You seem not to really understand the scientific principles involved here,which leads to the obvious question of how you can be opposed to what you don't even understand?
if we did we did if we didnt we didnt-but the whole thing is based on mutation's and the chances of a mutation benefiting the gene is highly unlilkly-regardless of what fossils have been found-and for the evolution theory to work then these mutations must be happening almost constantly and effectivly and the whole idea of there being no design realy boggles me because everything in life has design even the simplest cell's-and we all know there is no such thing as a simple cell-...o.k. scientists have discovered only a bare few examples of mutations but that dosent scientifically prove that everything has evolved from nothing-after all life comes from life-name one example where life came from dead matter or anything thats not living-
if we did we did if we didnt we didnt-but the whole thing is based on mutation's and the chances of a mutation benefiting the gene is highly unlilkly-regardless of what fossils have been found-and for the evolution theory to work then these mutations must be happening almost constantly and effectivly and the whole idea of there being no design realy boggles me because everything in life has design even the simplest cell's-and we all know there is no such thing as a simple cell-...o.k. scientists have discovered only a bare few examples of mutations but that dosent scientifically prove that everything has evolved from nothing-after all life comes from life-name one example where life came from dead matter or anything thats not living-
Again,study the Miller-Erey experiment.You have been shown this more than once,so you obviously refuse to consider any facts that might confuse and disturb you.The building blocks of life HAVE been created form inanimate materials.Try and actually learn about what you are debating insteading of ignoring what people give you.
The chance of any single mutation benefiting any living thing is slight,but when you take billions of years and millions of small mutations it does add up to changes that work.Those changes that don't work die off,and thereby make room for the changes that do work.All you need to know about positive mutations is this.Go and learn why black people from Africa turned white when they migrated north to Europe.You cannot even use the Bible as an excuse here.Any such supposed Adam and Eve progeny still came from lands that were populated by dark skinned black haired people.Arabs.So how and why did fair skinned blondes evolve when people moved uptown?
if we did we did if we didnt we didnt-but the whole thing is based on mutation's and the chances of a mutation benefiting the gene is highly unlilkly-regardless of what fossils have been found-and for the evolution theory to work then these mutations must be happening almost constantly and effectivly and the whole idea of there being no design realy boggles me because everything in life has design even the simplest cell's-and we all know there is no such thing as a simple cell-...o.k. scientists have discovered only a bare few examples of mutations but that dosent scientifically prove that everything has evolved from nothing-after all life comes from life-name one example where life came from dead matter or anything thats not living-
Wrong. We have ample evidence of mutations, most of them being "lethal" or neutral. but as I've shown to you, and you've ignored or dismissed, it only takes the positive ones to occur occasionally for the net positive effect to become obvious.
Well, we know how mutations are caused, and we find that factor (usually radiation. Why do you suppose doctors warn against too many X-rays? Because your brain will get smarter, or your manhood extended? Nope. It "mutates" your cellular structure, siily!) . Next, we know how often, in nature, how often these happen. It's been documented and measured. FRom theer is't only simple math as to how long it might take for a significant improvement to occur.
As well, it wasn't necessary for a whole bunch of different types to evolve on their own, independent and separate from each other. Nope. That's not how family trees develop, and it would not have generated the vast diversity we have in the time allowed. Instead, one rodent type, with all it's accumulated mutations, advantages and systems, branched out into more specialized type, which led to even more specialized types, eetc. eetc.
Soon we had literally millions of different types, all related. You, me, the apes, the lemurs, the dolphins. So simple when you learn how, huh?
Of course, on simple uneducated first glance, it's awe-inspiring and intellectually intimidating. but when you learn the simple, logical step-wise process, it becomes an "aha!" moment!
lifertexan qouted me on saying it was silly that a bacteria could evolve into a cat but thats exactly what evolution suggest's that all life hasevolv ed from single celled organism's -what kind of logic is that-what a bacteria cant evolve into a cat but the rest of life can-you tell me-since your on his side on this argument
The process is very slow and incremental. Significant changes occur only every few thousands years. When did the station wagon start being an SUV?
The process is very slow and incremental. Significant changes occur only every few thousands years. When did the station wagon start being an SUV?
you see this is where there could be a hole in the whole thing and i dont know i could be wrong-and dont get me wrong i do beleive the body can adapt to certain thing's in the enviroment-thats why the white skin came about-certain africans developing immunity to certain things n stuff-----but,when you say it only happens every few thousand years-how many thousand years?............................................ ...........................
-right lets say-1000 years-the earth is what 4.2 billion years -4.2million mutations-how many mutations would be needed to change a single celled organism into a mammal?how many different living species are out there now-millions-so all their genes must have mutated to become what they are now-and not only one or two species but every species-thats alot of mutation's that dosent sound like a few every few thousand years-.................................................. ...
and -lets say their was a species in the middle of evolving if the mutated gene was only being carried bye a couple of family's of the same species or family memebers,then that even shortens the chance......thats what im sayin-would these mutations not have to be happening constantly and effectivly/or at least constantly and every now and again effectivly-oh yeah them numbers dont add up even if it was happening every few thousand years-thats what i think anyway but prove me wrong if you may/i'll put me hands up im no expert but i'm not thick either just havent been schooled on the-subject-
another question-what invironmental changes would be needed to cange a species-i mean does the invironment eve change that much-i know it can and has changed dramatically in the past-volcano's-meteor's and so on-and usually anything n their paths are wiped out-but animals get along fine in their environment-they al have teir tools and insticnts to survive,and if they needed something to change for the better wouldnt that need a design mechanism or plan-like evrything that needs to be "fixed"-
one more question how long did it take dinosaures to evolve into what they were and when they were wiped out did it wipe out nearly them all.
because if it did then we could betalkng only 2 billion years or something.
BTW-not been smart here or anything but that scientific experiment you showed me is hardly proof of the evolution of species
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.
