Oh, darn that wily evolution! It just won't quit! (myth, God, Christians)
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.
Human evolution (as taught by Darwin) DID NOT HAPPEN!!! Creation (as taught by Christians) DID NOT HAPPEN!!! Both camps are wrong on this one. THAT's the truth.
1....Darwin did not teach evolution.
2...Evolution did and continues to happen.
3...Creation as taught by Christians, did not happen...Ya got one right at least.
4...Your theory of alien creation did not happen... It is only as viable as the Christian creation theory, which is utter nonsense.
^^^BTW, this is a 900 year old skull. Your mainstream science Gods have been concealing evidence like this from YOU for years. You know I'm right, that's why you keep following my posts. Give it up Sans, I can back my claims up (unlike the theists you are used to debating with). Why would mainstream science conceal this truth? Because mainstream science gambled BIG TIME when it cosigned Darwin's theory of evolution. Now, there could be 900 year old physical proof that ETs did infact interbreed with humans. Such a discovery would change everything. Mainstream science is not yet ready to be THAT wrong about our own origins. This is why I say that mainstream science is a religion in itself.
Last edited by urbancharlotte; 12-15-2010 at 05:21 AM..
I just watched a BBC programme about newly discovered species ( in the last decade) and was fascinated by the Langkawi bent-toed gecko which shows evolution in progress so to speak ( almost at the bottom of the page), :
Looks like the world-wide amphibian die-off we've been hearing about for a while now is slowing due to the frogs in question evolving and becoming immune to the fungus that has been killing them.
1. I was asking YOU earlier why ya'll thought resistance to fungus by a frog population was proof of evolution. I wondered out-loud if you guys ALSO thought resistance to various diseases by the Europeans, compared to Native Americans, was proof the Europeans were more highly evolved. In other words, I wanted to see if YOU were as racist as the logical extension of the premise.
There's nothing racist about observing facts. You're the one adding the "more or less evolved" value judgement. People who understand the science here know that the only real distinction is "different or similar". Nice attempt to turn the tables, though. I'm sure god will give you extra brownie points for the rhetoric.
Quote:
2. You correctly stated that resistance to something like that in a particular environment had NOTHING to do with evolving upwards or down. I agree with you 100% and I'm glad you aren't racist.
Nothing in biology has anything to do with "upwards or down". That would require a purpose or plan behind evolution, and there simply is not one. Everything living today is equally "highly" evolved, to use your words. They're all the end product of 3.5 billion years of evolution.
So the example in the OP is evolution even though it has nothing to do with moving "upwards or down" (however you measure that). Just like the human-chimp split is evidence of evolution but doesn't say that humans are more evolved than chimps. Just like the fact that common descent is true says nothing about which species alive today are higher or lower. There's simply no concept of "upwards or down", except maybe in the case where species go extinct - that's a pretty obvious down. Evolution cares about "good enough" instead of "moving towards absolute perfection", and surviving is evidence that you're good enough just like the rest of life.
You need to get past this idea that humans were put here to rule the earth if you want to actually start understanding nature.
Oh, gosh sorry...I should have put a note on the door saying "In order to participate in this conversation, you must have at least a minimal understanding of evolution."
Feel free to wander on back to your creationism class, with its fuzzy-felt cutouts of Noah and the ark.
lol
I remember felt.
It's the implications I was attacking. Everyone agrees that what is termed "evolutionary processes" exists to a degree. Thus, everyone believes that frogs can develop resistance to fungus. (Just as everyone also knows, that resistance will go away if the environment changes). It proves nothing in the debate because the debate is over whether or not evolution can cross the line and go from amphibian to mammal or reptile or squirrel.
So it's funny to see all the slams against churches, pastors, and creationists when no one actually disagrees with the article.
STILL no direct answer, I see. But boy can this guy dance around a thread! Apokalupsis, you are a true professional. Throw as many words as possible into a thread, continue with an illogical conclusion (i.e. my saying evolution isn't "higher or lower" means, to you, apparently, that I'm saying evolution doesn't happen *at all*...was that deliberate? I'm hoping so, for your sake), argue micro-points, in short: do everything but answer a direct question.
I hope that was clear. I don't actually expect an answer but at least I've amused myself for a few minutes here. Thanks for playing, hon!
lol, ah, but JerZ, the problem is, you take any answer and extrapolate it beyond what I mean, so I'm simply trying to be careful with what I say. I can see this has frustrated you, but unfortunately this is like trying to have a discussion on a playground with belligerent kids. Your main goal seems mostly to be just to make fun of others. For instance, the evolution answer. Evolution doesn't happen at all?? Where did I say that? NO ONE believes that evolution (especially micro-evolution) doesn't happen at all.
So, even though I'm sure you aren't actually interested in an answer, I'll try anyway for the sake of others who might be.
For the Jews. I will assume you want to know if I think the Jews got God's wrath during the Holocaust? Well I believe that beginning in 70 A.D., and until 1948 or so, the Bible came true in Deuteronomy chapter 28. (to name just one Scripture) The Holocaust was part of that.
I think that would qualify as God's wrath, but that doesn't take the Germans off the hook. Hitler received some just punishment and continues to do so in hell.
For the Native Americans, I don't know. God allows suffering for many reasons, only one of which is wrath. All I can do is make a guess. I don't think so for the Northern American tribes, but I would probably guess the Aztecs did because of their practice of human sacrifice. Those are just guesses.
Even if he did, why then didn't he ORIGINALLY make the frogs immune to the fungus? Surely, being god, he knew in advance that this fungus would attack and kill them, so if he wanted them to survive it, he would have been smart enough to make them immune to it from the start.
But, he didn't. So either he isn't capable of knowing the future, or he's a sadistic b*st*rd who likes toying with his creations, OR...he doesn't exist. In all three of those cases, he doesn't deserve worship, nor the title of 'god'.
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.
