It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

trees and grass and all that stuff

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Ok, this MIGHT be a stupid question, but it is one i started thinking about last night and so here goes:
Whenever i have heard debates between evolutionists and creationists, it seems to focus on one of two points.

1: about the actual position of the planet (creationists say "how could everything be so perfect" evos say: "if it wasnt, we wouldnt be here")
2: evolution of man.

So i was thinking last night, and first off, i want to know, where exactly do evolutionists believe everything came from?

Do they think it was chemical reactions?

If so, how come those chemical reactions caused water in some areas, desert in others, grass in others. What about trees and flowers and all that? How did they come about? (i'm asking this to evolutionists)....and if you believe everything natural on this earth came about via some reaction....then how come our scientists have never been able to recreate ANTHING from scratch (not even a blade of grass)

I dont know if this has been asked before, but i am really interested in seeing how these things are explained from a evolutionary point of view.

Also, according to you...where does all life on earth come from?

thanks




posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 03:39 AM
link   
Biological life exists down to a scale that is microscopic...beyond microscopic, since DNA is so small that you need super powered electron microscopes to even get a glimpse of it.

For instance your life started, not by some god but by microscopic chemical reaction between just one of a billion of your father's sperm and just one of your mothers eggs.

As above so below is the old saying. In other words, all life begins this way from the microscopic level to the macroscopic. Some creatures like ameoba are asexual and just split in half, and then half again, and half again.

More complex creatures eat the less complex creatures and get larger.

Imagine the primordial ocean, teaming with these organisms.
Solar and Cosmic radiation and weather phenomena and diet change these organisms over time.
Some life is deposited on land when the water recedes or waterspouts, hurricanes, and tsunamis throw them thousands of miles from their original home. Some of these things adapt to their new environments and have offspring across millions of years, like the grasses and trees.

And example of the above is the sands of the Sahara dessert that get blown high into the atmosphere every summer, and dumped dessert born bacteria on Florida every Fall. Check a map to see that mad migration distance. This happens all over the planet, all the time.
Sometimes it rains spiders or frogs.

Where did the origingal life forms come from, well maybe space is teeming with microscopic life, and it collected here when the planet coalesced, or was dumped here by comets.
After all we have to use super powered electron microscopes to see a virus and we do not have super powered electron microscopes trained on space do we?

No we have various telescopes and radioscopes and the like that can only really sense radiation and super humongous objects from hundreds of thousands miles to hundreds of billions of lightyears away. If something so small as a normal car was speeding toward us at the distance to mars right now we would not even see that, so how can we expect to see lifeforms that may be as small as a virus or somewhere between a virus and a car?

Its not really important where life came from, but where its going and what you do with it.
Creationists are just plain dumb, if any intelligent life created life, it sure the hell isn't alive now and its not going to come back to do anything but tell the creationists they are wrong about everything and that their "god" is very dissapointed in the mess they made of the
biological experiment on this planet.


[edit on 11-6-2006 by Legalizer]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 03:59 AM
link   
yeah....see, i was reading your post and thinking about what i would reply, but then i got to this bit:



Originally posted by Legalizer
Creationists are just plain dumb



and thought.....meh...forget it


[edit on 11-6-2006 by geek101]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Evolution is extremley complex. We don't know 100% for sure on how it works. We do know it happens. You also seem to be holding onto a common misconception, evolution has nothing really to do with HOW life first arose. Nothing. Evolution deals specifically with the 'evolution' of life after it arose. Any discussion on evolutionary theory i.e. how it works, won't provide you with your answer's.

Do you believe gravity? Do you dispute gravity as being the reason we don't fly off into space or do you accept it as a reality?

I'll assume your answer is yes. But why? Not many people will dispute the reality of gravity and it's effects. Yet none seem to care that anything and everything dealing with gravity is just a theory. We know gravity is tied directly to mass, yet we don't know 100% for sure how or what gravity specifically is. Yet I've never ever once seen a religous person dispute the validity of gravity existing.

Light, we know light exist's. Yet we don't know for the life of us what light exactly is. We know it move's at a specific speed through various mediums, such as 186,000mps through the vaccuum of space without any gravitational influences impeding it's velocities. Yet we don't see religous people attacking that validity of light existing.

We know evolution happens. We've seen and studied the transitionary fossils, we've studied the genetics behind some of it's working's. We've witnessed it in nature and in the lab. Yet we still don't know how it works 100% for sure, just as with gravity and light. And yet, evolution is misconceptualized by creationist's and IDist's and they attack the theory of HOW it works based upon those misconceptions and think they've won the case.

Perhaps this is why Lagalizer made the statment that creationists are dumb. In a sense, he/she is right. Using old disproven theories or picking and choosing which theories to attack does seem to be just plain dumb. We can sit here and attack only those scientific theories which seemingly disagree with our favorite all powerfull father like deity, but we can't be bothered to stay on top of current discoveries and theories to better defend our view's. Yes, that is dumb. It's just plainly ignorant. People consider learning a chore these days. People just can't be bothered. And so we see post's like these. And ATS is supposed to have adopted the 'deny ignorance' mantra, appearently for no reason.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Evolution is extremley complex. We don't know 100% for sure on how it works. We do know it happens. You also seem to be holding onto a common misconception, evolution has nothing really to do with HOW life first arose. Nothing. Evolution deals specifically with the 'evolution' of life after it arose. Any discussion on evolutionary theory i.e. how it works, won't provide you with your answer's.

So you are saying that how we evolved from inanimate chemicals in to life has nothing to do with evolution?


Light, we know light exist's. Yet we don't know for the life of us what light exactly is.

Sorry I find that funny coming from someone named PROTON


We know evolution happens. We've seen and studied the transitionary fossils, we've studied the genetics behind some of it's working's. We've witnessed it in nature and in the lab. Yet we still don't know how it works 100% for sure, just as with gravity and light. And yet, evolution is misconceptualized by creationist's and IDist's and they attack the theory of HOW it works based upon those misconceptions and think they've won the case.

Yes we have watched evolution in progress, but we have never seen some evolve from one species to another. When this happens where does the new information come from? Yes a dog can produce another variant dog of a dog but how does it produce a non-dog?


Perhaps this is why Lagalizer made the statment that creationists are dumb. In a sense, he/she is right. Using old disproven theories or picking and choosing which theories to attack does seem to be just plain dumb. We can sit here and attack only those scientific theories which seemingly disagree with our favorite all powerfull father like deity, but we can't be bothered to stay on top of current discoveries and theories to better defend our view's. Yes, that is dumb. It's just plainly ignorant. People consider learning a chore these days. People just can't be bothered. And so we see post's like these. And ATS is supposed to have adopted the 'deny ignorance' mantra, appearently for no reason.

Are you implying just because one believes in God that some one is dumb? And FYI not all creationist believe that the earth was created 6000 years ago, I do believe that evolution took place, I just don't see how it could happen by itself.

edit: me am spel relE wel [sarcasm]

[edit on 11-6-2006 by Mr Mxyztplk]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   


So you are saying that how we evolved from inanimate chemicals in to life has nothing to do with evolution?


Correct. Evolutionary theory deals nothing with how life FIRST arose, just with how life evolves from life.



Sorry I find that funny coming from someone named PROTON


Sorry, I fail to see the humour. Care to point it out?



Yes we have watched evolution in progress, but we have never seen some evolve from one species to another. When this happens where does the new information come from? Yes a dog can produce another variant dog of a dog but how does it produce a non-dog?


Good question. Unfortunatly, we don't currently have the answer to this question. We just know that evolution does in fact happen. There's ton's of variant's to evolutionary theory on how or how long for such an event to happen, unfortunatly, none of those theories are 100% fact's.



Are you implying just because one believes in God that some one is dumb? And FYI not all creationist believe that the earth was created 6000 years ago, I do believe that evolution took place, I just don't see how it could happen by itself.


God is more of the 'easy way out' answer to all question's. It's great that you do accept evolution as a reality, just as you accept gravity and many other thing's in life that we don't currently have answer's to but know exist.

Using god as the 'cure-all' answer is imo, pretty ignorant and dumb. The debate on god is another entirely lengthy discussion all on it's own. One that those who believe in god don't even bother to research on their own. Which god do you follow?

Just because we don't have the answer's to how life first arose, or what initiated the big bang, doesn't default the answer to whatever unproven diety you chose to bow down to unquestionably. One of the hardest thing's for people to say is, I don't know.

Well, let me be the first. Maybe I can start a trend here. I DON'T KNOW. I don't have the answer's to life. I don't know what started the big bang. No one does. And anyone who claims to have that answer is taking you for a ride. Open your eye's. Even though you can't physically see it, you do have a brain. Use it. Think for yourself. Learn for yourself. Look at all angle's. Research even your own beliefs, even the part's that disagree with what you think is right.

If you tell me you have personal proof of your god. What's this prove? Nothing. That hindi over there, she's got personal proof for her special diety of choice as well. That native american 3 blocks down, he's got personal proof for his special diety of choice. All the ancient egyptians, they had 'personal proof' for their dieties. People who spout personal proof need to be back hand slapped with thier special holy book of choice.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   
If you were God/Godess/Universal-mind whatever you want to call it, would you micro-manage everything? Or would you being all knowing create the building blocks, knowing that intelligent life that you could live through would eventually be created.

Look inward for all of the deeper answers, they are all there, for that is where God is.

By the way, I do believe "As above so below" is refering to reincarnation.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Yes we have watched evolution in progress, but we have never seen some evolve from one species to another. When this happens where does the new information come from? Yes a dog can produce another variant dog of a dog but how does it produce a non-dog?


well it doesn't, it works like this, there are two dogs, one goes north and one goes south, the one that went north gets hairier and the one that goes south loses it's hair because of climate differences, the one that went north has to hunt big animals to find meat so it gets bigger and it's claws and teeth grow longer while the one that went south hunts small fast animals so it gets smaller and learns to run quickly to catch them, then a man comes along and calls dog ''a'' '' big hairy teeth monster'' and dog ''b'' ''little bald rat catcher''.

we name and classify animals according to common traits, evolution doesn't, it just allows organisims to adapt to their environment. it is not a process of biodiversity, biodiversity is a bi-product, evolution does not allow one animal to suddenly morph into another, the process is by it's nature so slow that it is impossible to measure in a snap shot.

look either way, wheres the argument, creationists say god created the earth 6000 odd years ago, first he made light and dark, then he made the oceans and the land, then he put fish in the sea,plants on the land and birds in the air, then mammels and then humans.

the theroy of evolution says first the earth came into being and orbited the sun, water developed as the earth cooled, oganisims developed here first and then moved to the land, first plants dominated the land, then donosaurs came along and evolved into birds then the mammels rose up and one of them became man. when asked what started it they just shrug, no-one knows.

wheres the argument? time lines? i can't see much else that's different, except the bible has the whole thing simplified, so what, if i wasn't educated in a modern school i'd need the story of evolution simplified aswell, so whats the big deal?



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Correct. Evolutionary theory deals nothing with how life FIRST arose, just with how life evolves from life.

I'm sorry I don't understand how you can say that how chemicals turned into life has nothing to do with evolution.


Sorry, I fail to see the humour. Care to point it out?

This is one of those things you either get or you don't, I t just might be my sense of humor. Either way I don't want to get into a insult match with you, just conversion.


Good question. Unfortunatly, we don't currently have the answer to this question. We just know that evolution does in fact happen. There's ton's of variant's to evolutionary theory on how or how long for such an event to happen, unfortunatly, none of those theories are 100% fact's. [

To me it is the most important question. This and the Big Bang are the main reasons for my belief in a God.


God is more of the 'easy way out' answer to all question's. It's great that you do accept evolution as a reality, just as you accept gravity and many other thing's in life that we don't currently have answer's to but know exist.

Sometimes God is the only answer that makes any sense. It's not an easy way out in a cause and effect universe.


Using god as the 'cure-all' answer is imo, pretty ignorant and dumb. The debate on god is another entirely lengthy discussion all on it's own. One that those who believe in god don't even bother to research on their own. Which god do you follow?

Please proton lets keep this civil, I have no interest in being called dumb or calling any one dumb. As for my beliefs I'm agnostic, I don't believe that some one can know the unknowable



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Pieman,


well it doesn't, it works like this, there are two dogs, one goes north and one goes south, the one that went north gets hairier and the one that goes south loses it's hair because of climate differences, the one that went north has to hunt big animals to find meat so it gets bigger and it's claws and teeth grow longer while the one that went south hunts small fast animals so it gets smaller and learns to run quickly to catch them, then a man comes along and calls dog ''a'' '' big hairy teeth monster'' and dog ''b'' ''little bald rat catcher''.

So these dogs, how did the DNA “know” that it has to produce more hair for the dog going north? How did it know how to grow bigger teeth? Where does all this information come from?


we name and classify animals according to common traits, evolution doesn't, it just allows organisims to adapt to their environment. it is not a process of biodiversity, biodiversity is a bi-product, evolution does not allow one animal to suddenly morph into another, the process is by it's nature so slow that it is impossible to measure in a snap shot.

I'm not saying that it didn't happen I saying that DNA cannot rewrite its self with more information. With the mutation you have additional information, so how does this information come into being?


look either way, wheres the argument, creationists say god created the earth 6000 odd years ago, first he made light and dark, then he made the oceans and the land, then he put fish in the sea,plants on the land and birds in the air, then mammels and then humans.

Yes this does seam to be the Christian argument


the theroy of evolution says first the earth came into being and orbited the sun, water developed as the earth cooled, oganisims developed here first and then moved to the land, first plants dominated the land, then donosaurs came along and evolved into birds then the mammels rose up and one of them became man. when asked what started it they just shrug, no-one knows.

I can't say that I know, But I can see from the data that something is “running the show” if you will.


wheres the argument? time lines? i can't see much else that's different, except the bible has the whole thing simplified, so what, if i wasn't educated in a modern school i'd need the story of evolution simplified aswell, so whats the big deal?

The big deal is that I have a lot of time on my hands and this is fun to talk about.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   


I'm sorry I don't understand how you can say that how chemicals turned into life has nothing to do with evolution.


Learn more about evolution then.



To me it is the most important question. This and the Big Bang are the main reasons for my belief in a God.


Your reason for belief in god? Can you elaborate more on this?



Sometimes God is the only answer that makes any sense. It's not an easy way out in a cause and effect universe.


Only answer that make's sense? That's nonsense. It's very much an easy way out answer to currently unanswerable questions. How did the universe go boom? Easy answer, god did it. How did life first arise, easy answer, god did it. No need to bother trying to learn, just need to have an unquestioning faith that a god even exist's and that it's the god you chose to believe in. Then we have to dismiss the mountain's of personal proof's from people who bow down to other god's and come up with easy way out answer's of my evil god created those other 'gods' to take them away from my god of choice.



Please proton lets keep this civil, I have no interest in being called dumb or calling any one dumb. As for my beliefs I'm agnostic, I don't believe that some one can know the unknowable


Your a very weak agnostic then. Agnostics typically don't necessarily believe in a god existing per se, just the possibility of one and that knowing if there is one is technically unknowable. Of course, there are a variety that I've seen, such as you being on the weaker end and some on the 'stronger' end swaying more towards 'athiesm'. I personally wouldn't consider myself agnostic nor athiest. I don't necessarily discount the possibility of their being some sort of creator, but I hold no belief in such as there exist's no evidence that this is even true. I'll argue against any and all religous concepts of the variety of god's people bow down to though.



So these dogs, how did the DNA “know” that it has to produce more hair for the dog going north? How did it know how to grow bigger teeth? Where does all this information come from?


Another common misconception, DNA and evolution doesn't "know". There are a variety of variable's that goes even outside the body itself. Climate can play a role. Radiation, Cosmic Rays, etc. There are just so many variable's. I'd be surprised if we ever come to a definitive mode of operation for evolution.



I'm not saying that it didn't happen I saying that DNA cannot rewrite its self with more information. With the mutation you have additional information, so how does this information come into being?


See above for some possible ways. There's more ways DNA can be rewritten in a way.



I can't say that I know, But I can see from the data that something is “running the show” if you will.


Doesn't sound very 'agnostic' to me. There doesn't appear to be anything running the show at all.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:22 AM
link   
ok, this is getting a little complicated for me. I will comment on certain things in previous posts, and then get down to asking the question i really wanted the answer to.

First of all, i am not totally against the idea of evolution per se, i think there are verses in the Quran which allude to the idea of evolution.

Ok, onto the comments,
Mr Mxyztplk (THE hardest name i have EVER had to spell here by the way
)

you are hitting the nail on the head here with so many of your comments.
My original comment was...if people who dont believe in a Creator (i will use this term instead of evolutionist), believe that everything happened by accident....then they must believe that everything came out of some chemical reaction.

Proton....you said that evolution doesnt deal with how life first arose.
But THAT is the whole point of my question.
What exactly DOES deal with that then?

Pieman.....you said that water was formed as the earth cooled.....then why did it just form in certain areas?.....what caused it to form in the first place?....how did these organisms grow, develop DNA, develop consciousness?

And to get back to my main point....if ALL of this, was a reaction by chemicals (no matter how hard i find it to believe that different chemical reactions cause desert in some places, water in others, greenery in others, etc etc).....if all of this was caused by chemicals....then why have our scientists never been able to make even something as simple as a blade of grass out of chemicals alone?


Mr Mxyztpllk wrote:
So these dogs, how did the DNA “know” that it has to produce more hair for the dog going north? How did it know how to grow bigger teeth? Where does all this information come from?


exactly!!

Anyway....main question again....so as not to complicate things too much:
if everything was caused by mere chemical reactions....why have we NEVER been able to produce anything in science, the same as we see in nature?



[edit on 12-6-2006 by geek101]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:59 AM
link   


you are hitting the nail on the head here with so many of your comments.
My original comment was...if people who dont believe in a Creator (i will use this term instead of evolutionist), believe that everything happened by accident....then they must believe that everything came out of some chemical reaction.


Everything didn't happen 'on accident'. Another misconception from the unlearned creationist crowed.



Proton....you said that evolution doesnt deal with how life first arose.
But THAT is the whole point of my question.
What exactly DOES deal with that then?


Could've sworn I stated evolution deals with how life evolves from life. One theory on how life first arose is abiogenesis. The two shouldn't be confused as they are entirely seperate concepts.



Pieman.....you said that water was formed as the earth cooled.....then why did it just form in certain areas?.....what caused it to form in the first place?....how did these organisms grow, develop DNA, develop consciousness?


We don't currently have a suitable answer to how life first arose or how DNA developed or what consciousness even is really. Yes, we being conscious beings can't even define our own consciousness.

Picture a flat rock and a rock with a bowl like depression. You tell me where water will collect readily.



And to get back to my main point....if ALL of this, was a reaction by chemicals (no matter how hard i find it to believe that different chemical reactions cause desert in some places, water in others, greenery in others, etc etc).....if all of this was caused by chemicals....then why have our scientists never been able to make even something as simple as a blade of grass out of chemicals alone?


You need to pay attention in school or read more up on science. Chemical reactions don't create desserts or water to collect in places where it would readily naturally collect. Scientist's have been able to create primitive life in the lab before, and still do in a way. We haven't seen life arise on it's own experimentally as of yet, but then again, we don't have all the variable's for how life arose on our planet 3 some-odd billion years ago. You can't just slop a mess of chemicals together and expect it to readily create life, if this were so, our solar system would be literally teeming with life. There are certain requirements for life to get a kick start.



Anyway....main question again....so as not to complicate things too much:
if everything was caused by mere chemical reactions....why have we NEVER been able to produce anything in science, the same as we see in nature?


You REALLY should pay attention to science related discussion's and in school, and take the initiative to learn more about this stuff. There's ton's of information out there via google.com. You seem to hold onto many misconceptions, and this is your main reason for not being able to answer your question's. Your thinking it's one way through misconceptions when in reality it's so much more. Your best bet is to forget everything you think you know and take a more active role in educating yourself. Science isn't some big evil let's destroy god operation. Science doesn't even give a rats buttocks about god or any form of diety. It's those people who are insecure with their own faith in whichever grand poo-bah they chose to bow down too. God is such a general term to me anyways. Which god? There's thousands out there, be more specific.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n

Everything didn't happen 'on accident'. Another misconception from the unlearned creationist crowed.


you know, you'd do well to treat people with a bit more respect. I never said i knew everything. Isnt that the reason people ask questions???

So if everything didnt happen by accident....then how, in your opinion, DID it happen?


We don't currently have a suitable answer to how life first arose or how DNA developed or what consciousness even is really. Yes, we being conscious beings can't even define our own consciousness.

Picture a flat rock and a rock with a bowl like depression. You tell me where water will collect readily.


fair enough....you dont have an answet to how life arose. Thats fine. At least you admit that. And the water thing....good answer.


You need to pay attention in school or read more up on science. Chemical reactions don't create desserts or water to collect in places where it would readily naturally collect.


then what does? (create deserts and greenery, i mean)


Scientist's have been able to create primitive life in the lab before, and still do in a way.


really?....thats fascinating....can you provide any links for that or further explanation at least about what has been created?


You can't just slop a mess of chemicals together and expect it to readily create life


but isnt that the whole basis of your argument?....that universe explodes....chemicals fly around, and left to their own devices, create everything we know today?




You REALLY should pay attention to science related discussion's and in school, and take the initiative to learn more about this stuff.


hence me asking questions on here. Isnt that a way to learn about stuff?


You seem to hold onto many misconceptions, and this is your main reason for not being able to answer your question's.


on the contrary, i havent actually put forward ANY of my beliefs. I merely asked a question. I am not an expert on evolution nor do i claim to know everything my religion says about it.


Science isn't some big evil let's destroy god operation.


Again, i believe science and religion go together. Please stop assuming things about me and my beliefs.

So again, my question....has science been able to produce anything (anything at all) that we find in nature....through the means by which you and others beleive stuff came into existence in the first place?

[edit on 12-6-2006 by geek101]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:30 AM
link   
Okay, you want straight, simple, no-nonsense answers. Here we go.


Originally posted by geek101
Ok, this MIGHT be a stupid question


There's no such thing. That's why most of us are here, either to ask or to answer.



So i was thinking last night, and first off, i want to know, where exactly do evolutionists believe everything came from?

Do they think it was chemical reactions?


As an evolutionist myself, I'd have to say that I believe all life came about as a byproduct of the chaotic conditions on the primordial earth. I'd say I favor the organic chemical soup energized by lightning strikes hypothesis, in which the first bits of proto-life were created when the rich chemical pools on the young earth were energized by lightning or radiation. This is called Abiogenesis, which is greek for "non biological origins".



If so, how come those chemical reactions caused water in some areas, desert in others, grass in others. What about trees and flowers and all that? How did they come about? (i'm asking this to evolutionists)....


The first part of this question has nothing to do with evolution or abiogenesis. Earth's geological features are a result of wind and water motion driven by sunlight, and to a lesser extent geological events and plate tectonics. Earth's geological makeup has a great deal to do with the resultant location of deserts and forests.

Trees and flowers evolved from simpler plants such as seaweeds and planktons which experienced greater survivability when rooted closer to shore. As a side note to this, grass is far from simple in biological terms, and is the most recent form of plant life to evolve.



and if you believe everything natural on this earth came about via some reaction....then how come our scientists have never been able to recreate ANTHING from scratch (not even a blade of grass)


This is not entirely true. Scientists have been able to recreate some of the key reactions that may have occurred in the earth's early history, creating simple organic compounds that may have led to the formation of simple life. It's important to note that these reactions needed no external help aside from sunlight, which in the earth's early days would have been quite abundant.



Also, according to you...where does all life on earth come from?


All life on earth, according to me (though I'm far from an expert source), came from random but reproducible reactions in earth's early history which led to the formation of increasingly complex organic compounds. When these compunds attained the complexity of simple viruses (which are considered by a vast majority of the scientific community to not be alive), they became able to adapt to their surroundings, and the long, painful march of evolution began.



thanks


You're welcome.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Thousand

thank you


this is what i had hoped for in asking such a question. You have given me alot to read through (in the links you provided) and honestly, that is what i wanted.
Even though i am a believer in a Creator, i have no strong feelings towards evolution as a whole. As i said already, my holy book even has verses which hint towards such a process.

I thank you, for not calling me dumb, or assuming anything about me. Your post was informative and intelligent and i appreciate that.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   




Mr Mxyztpllk wrote:
So these dogs, how did the DNA “know” that it has to produce more hair for the dog going north? How did it know how to grow bigger teeth? Where does all this information come from?


exactly!!





[edit on 12-6-2006 by geek101]


i think its called survival of the fittest/strongest...6 dogs go north and 3 of them have long hair and 3 have short hair....2 long hairs breed and have 4 pups all with long hair(all grow to maturity..because there hair keeps them warm)

2 short hairs breed and have 4 pups with short hair(only 1 grows to maturity because the cold kills the others)...its not DNA telling the hair its needed....its the lack of DNA not giving the short hairs a chance in there locality....whereas if they had gone south to warmer climes...it would be the hairy dog at dissadvantage and so it would likely die out in that locality...thats how it works IMO.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heratix
2 short hairs breed and have 4 pups with short hair(only 1 grows to maturity because the cold kills the others)...its not DNA telling the hair its needed....its the lack of DNA not giving the short hairs a chance in there locality....whereas if they had gone south to warmer climes...it would be the hairy dog at dissadvantage and so it would likely die out in that locality...thats how it works IMO.



another good post. See, this is what i wanted. Not people calling me dumb...lol

Thats certainly a good way to look at it. I love this site. I love that there are all kinds of experts, and if not experts, then people who know alot more than i do, about certain subjects.

Let me make my position clear. I am a muslim. i beleive in a Creator. I believe that God made the Universe. But as i have pointed out before, there ARE verses in the Quran which perhaps mention evolution ("we made their frame stronger")

So i am not pretending to know all the answers. And i like it when people put forth their opinions and their knowledge. Its good. I am curious. I like to learn. And whatever Proton thinks about google being the "be all and end all" of learning....its not......and although i dont appreciate it when people answer questions and tell you your dumb for having your beliefs....i DO appreciate it when people like this come on and give what appears to be a perfectly reasoned response.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:20 AM
link   
thank you...you gave me a nice warm glow.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heratix
thank you...you gave me a nice warm glow.



....you are more than welcome....credit where credit is due and all that.
i just dont like people assuming and questioning me on things i havent laid claim to.
This isnt the Spanish Inquisition after all



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join