|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 6:35:44 GMT 10
Out of all the DNA evidence and fossil evidence we have come up with there has been nothing that shows it is possible for one species to change into another one, and that is the crux of the theory of evolution.
Everything we have learned about biology, genetics, mutation, etc. tell us that one species cannot change into another, and if that does not occur than evolution as we define it today cannot be true. Unless, of course, the laws of nature changed at some point, and things evolved for possibly millions of years and that those laws of nature have now changed and evolution is not any longer occuring, and is now impossible.
I don't blame you for embracing Darwin's theory. Even the brightest and best of our scholars have bought into it. But now even the head paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History, after 30 years, had to admit to himself that paleontology had proven evolution did not occur.
Yes, I know you are going to claim a chimpanzee has 98% the same DNA material as a human. But that doesn't mean humans are chimpanzees with two percent more DNA. The chimpanzee has two percent of its DNA that is different from a human's, and vice versa. But that two percent is quite significantly different, and all of the DNA of both is put together very differently. That 98% is the same DNA proteins, but the 98% is not "the same" as one another's.
Have you researched where Darwin got his ideas originally? He got them from Mary Wallstonecraft Shelley's father, who got it from studying the Vedas. Yes, Hinduism. A RELIGION. You are religious, whether you want to admit that or not.
In this knowledge, despair.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 7:13:55 GMT 10
Evolution occurs, live with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 7:33:14 GMT 10
That's an assertion, not an argument.
Deal with it.
(If evolution occurs, It matters little whether I accept it or not, does it? My theistic leanings would be the result of my particular evolutionary tangent.
So why are you trying to convince me otherwise?)
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Jan 5, 2013 7:37:42 GMT 10
different species who mate...such as horse and donkey are sterile too. They cannot re-produce which means there isn't a chance they can evolve.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 7:48:15 GMT 10
It's incredible that in these post enlightenment times, there are people who are unable to come to grips that we evolved.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Jan 5, 2013 7:52:09 GMT 10
I believe in evolution...I just believe God created it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 8:06:24 GMT 10
We tend to think of DNA "evidence" as infallible and omniscient, but it's not. For instance, we can prove that Sally Hemmings was involved with some member of Thomas Jefferson's family, because the present-day Hemmings family members' (of direct descent from Sally) DNA proves descent from some close relative of Thomas Jefferson, either himself or his brother or some other very close relative. But it has to be a very close relative, not a second cousin or third cousin once removed, etc., and in a direct line. We can tell a lot lengthwise through time down a line of direct descent, but not broadly across the population... We can prove a frog is related to another frog, but we cannot prove it is related to a salamander or a fish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 8:08:20 GMT 10
I haven't chosen a side on the creation/evolution debate. But my capacity for reason will not allow me to deny that there is a design involved. (And so I lean more on the side of ID)
But it is sufficient to say that I haven't seen anything to convince me we've evolved.
Til then, I suspend judgement.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Jan 5, 2013 9:02:46 GMT 10
Me too Jody - and I believe that God still has a hand in creation even upholding the very laws of nature with His will.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Jan 5, 2013 11:41:06 GMT 10
Buzz weren't those hybrids developed in a lab?
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Jan 5, 2013 12:11:32 GMT 10
these animals will not mate in the wild...big difference Buzz. being created in a lab is not natural selection.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Jan 5, 2013 13:46:53 GMT 10
yes Buzz these were also first produced in a lab.....and they can reproduce however they either pass on goat or sheep genes depending on whether its reproductive organs were formed from the goat embryo or from the sheep embryo and not all are fertile.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 15:32:15 GMT 10
But it is sufficient to say that I haven't seen anything to convince me we've evolved. Sufficient? For whom? I suggest you look harder. Putting humans aside for a moment, what about dogs? It is well established that all dog species evolved from wolves within a comparatively short timeframe, namely modern human history. I raised this before, but you ignored it... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 20:55:11 GMT 10
But it is sufficient to say that I haven't seen anything to convince me we've evolved. You need to study Apes a little more closely |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 23:49:23 GMT 10
Mary Shelly and Darwin were related - and Darwin had an open mind and traveled around the world and formulated his ideas from his observations. Francis Galton, the founder of Eugenics, (The philosophy that fueled the Nazi Holocaust) and Darwin were related too. (Understandably, You don't want to embrace that dark truth, though.) So..How open do you think one's mind ought to be? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 5, 2013 23:54:48 GMT 10
Those who do not move their beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary are delusional. I agree. Only, it's unfortunate that you can't see that you fall into this category. Overstating again, Buzz? You haven't even a small notion about how much education I have. I've never expressed it. But you are welcome to make any other projections ...speculations ...guesses. (You seem to prefer that than doing valid research.) |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 6, 2013 7:18:33 GMT 10
But it is sufficient to say that I haven't seen anything to convince me we've evolved. Sufficient? For whom? I suggest you look harder. Putting humans aside for a moment, what about dogs? It is well established that all dog species evolved from wolves within a comparatively short timeframe, namely modern human history. I raised this before, but you ignored it... It was ignored because it was irrelevant to the debate. I am disputing cross-species evolution. Dogs and wolves are from the same genus. If you read post one thoroughly, you would've already known that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2013 8:56:56 GMT 10
Sufficient? For whom? I suggest you look harder. Putting humans aside for a moment, what about dogs? It is well established that all dog species evolved from wolves within a comparatively short timeframe, namely modern human history. I raised this before, but you ignored it... It was ignored because it was irrelevant to the debate. I am disputing cross-species evolution. Dogs and wolves are from the same genus. If you read post one thoroughly, you would've already known that. And if you understood evolution, you would know it doesn't involve cross species. You are talking unnatural breeding. Evolution does not follow that path. This statement... Out of all the DNA evidence and fossil evidence we have come up with there has been nothing that shows it is possible for one species to change into another one, and that is the crux of the theory of evolution. Shows you clearly lack understanding of the evolution process. Species don't evolve into another. They are variants of an earlier form and this process can take a very ling time. My argument using wolves/ dogs was relevant. You always argue against macroevolution. I cited the textbook case to demonstrate it occurs. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 6, 2013 11:52:28 GMT 10
"Creation and evolution are NOT mutually exclusive . . . . creation is a fact . . . and evolution is a process . . ." -Dr. Kirtley Mather
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 7, 2013 5:26:30 GMT 10
Yeah... Not like say, a 'frog turning into a prince'...
---That's real.
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 7, 2013 7:06:55 GMT 10
You keep going on and on about "frog to prince".
Disprove it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 13, 2013 4:29:27 GMT 10
You keep going on and on about "frog to prince". Disprove it. On this, I am free to make the atheist-escapist claim and say: "Mine is a position of non-belief." (Bald not being a hair color, not collecting baseball cards is not a hobby, and all that nonsense.) It's up to you to prove it to me. Otherwise, I'm not obligated to alter my position." |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Jan 13, 2013 4:32:24 GMT 10
mud to man rib to woman - thats a fairy tale I never heard that one. But I have heard the one about the frog prince. |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 13, 2013 8:24:22 GMT 10
You keep going on and on about "frog to prince". Disprove it. On this, I am free to make the atheist-escapist claim and say: "Mine is a position of non-belief." (Bald not being a hair color, not collecting baseball cards is not a hobby, and all that nonsense.) It's up to you to prove it to me. Otherwise, I'm not obligated to alter my position." - disprove them! 1. The universal genetic code. All cells on Earth, from our white blood cells, to simple bacteria, to cells in the leaves of trees, are capable of reading any piece of DNA from any life form on Earth. This is very strong evidence for a common ancestor from which all life descended. 2. The fossil record. The fossil record shows that the simplest fossils will be found in the oldest rocks, and it can also show a smooth and gradual transition from one form of life to another. Please watch this video for an excellent demonstration of fossils transitioning from simple life to complex vertebrates. 3. Genetic commonalities. Human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (source), 80% with cows (source), 75% with mice (source), and so on. This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past. And the amount of difference between our genomes corresponds to how long ago our genetic lines diverged. 4. Common traits in embryos. Humans, dogs, snakes, fish, monkeys, eels (and many more life forms) are all considered "chordates" because we belong to the phylum Chordata. One of the features of this phylum is that, as embryos, all these life forms have gill slits, tails, and specific anatomical structures involving the spine. For humans (and other non-fish) the gill slits reform into the bones of the ear and jaw at a later stage in development. But, initially, all chordate embryos strongly resemble each other. In fact, pig embryos are often dissected in biology classes because of how similar they look to human embryos. These common characteristics could only be possible if all members of the phylum Chordata descended from a common ancestor. 5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria colonies can only build up a resistance to antibiotics through evolution. It is important to note that in every colony of bacteria, there are a tiny few individuals which are naturally resistant to certain antibiotics. This is because of the random nature of mutations. When an antibiotic is applied, the initial innoculation will kill most bacteria, leaving behind only those few cells which happen to have the mutations necessary to resist the antibiotics. In subsequent generations, the resistant bacteria reproduce, forming a new colony where every member is resistant to the antibiotic. This is natural selection in action. The antibiotic is "selecting" for organisms which are resistant, and killing any that are not. www.evolutionfaq.com/articles/five-profs-evolution |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Jan 13, 2013 8:28:30 GMT 10
|
|
