And Evolution is OUT of the Picture!

evolution is crap.

we got created by God.

there is also no big bang.

Well to some extent I do believe evolution has happened. But not undirected, not uncontrolled. Not by chance. As for the Big Bang. Bible can be read thes that in the beginning God created space and mass, and everything was in darkness, and in plasma state. Then suddenly God called for the light and he started this whole wonder about 17 billion years ago. If you want, I can do the math for you. It's really very simple. According to this, Man was actually created about 2.5 billion years ago. Maybe even before. If you read it the way I do, there is little difference between the bible's account and that of science. Only science has another word for God. It's more a hole in their theories than anything else. They seem to ommit him, something I think is just as sad as wiping God's name out of the bible, translate it into different languages and add spaces and such. But who knows? Maybe it is God's will that it be like that.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Much more of this and this topic will get moved to the Religion forum.

STOP WITH THIS NONSENSE!!!

That's right. Stop.

All of ya's.

It has been proven that MicroEvolution does occur.

It hasn't been proven that MacroEvolution occurs.

And MacroEvolution has been debunked by Genetics.
Genetics points and says that instead of MAcroEvolution occuring, us human in just say a billion years, should be nothing more than single celed organism's.

Hell The Y Chromosome of us humans should be out of us humans in 120,000 years. Thus leaving us with only Females. If we didn't have the technological knowledge and were living in a caveman world for the next 130,000 years....us humans would die off due to no males.

Genetics says we will be single celled organisms...Not anything you say is going to change that FACT.

And YES it is a FACT.

You CANNOT prove MacroEvolution. It has been debunked. MicroEvolution on the other hand...Has been Proved.

Live with it.

I agree, in my college studies in Archaeology and socio-psychology almost 'proved' in their own logical arguments that the time and zillion-to-one probability of random natural genetic 'chaotics' not to mention the weak evidence in remains, (I learned that much of the re-constructive sciences in fossil records require one part old bones and one part artistic vision by the diggers) leaves it weak and undesirable as a school of accuracy. My second year I walked out of anthropology with no looking back.

Going to post any links or will we continue with this random anecdotal pseudoscience?

Sounds like Sunday morning preaching at the choir practice! I thought this was a scientific discussion on whether or not evolution was viable?...

P...
m...

i dnt like evolution, it confuses me, if man started fom ape, where di ape start? you could go back and back and back to the big bang theory. that's all well and good but hen what caused this "big bang"? some perticles? where did they come from? se can rattle your brain for hours that

I dont think we should worry about who we were created by, know only that we are here and must worry about the seeds we create and the future we create for them.
Deep

Originally posted by longyforlife
i dnt like evolution, it confuses me, if man started fom ape, where di ape start? you could go back and back and back to the big bang theory. that's all well and good but hen what caused this "big bang"? some perticles? where did they come from? se can rattle your brain for hours that

Yeah, well any 3 year old will ask you where did god come from.

Evolution is bullsh*t, I can't believe people actually fall for that ridicules sh*t.

Whatever floats your boat....I guess.

[Edited on 1-12-2003 by glan]

Wow Glan,
thanks for closing this debate!
Deep

Originally posted by Gazrok
God, (no pun intended...)

Not this old horse again...

A fake discovery or two, doesn't all of a sudden disprove evolution, any more than the fake coffer of Jesus' brother James disproves Christ.

I'm sorry, but one fake skull and a made up story will not change the fact that evolution not only exists, but is the only logical explanation.

Evolution still makes more sense.

Amen to that...

If you really doubt evolution, by all means, go visit Austrailia or the Galapagos Islands... Your contention would be what....that these strange creatures were simply made different by God? No, they are different because they were geographically isolated from the rest of the world, and they (get this...) EVOLVED differently than their mainland counterparts....

Disbelieving evolution is like disbelieving that the sun isn't a star, but some deity. It isn't faith, it isn't just "theory"...it's simple common sense... Just look around you...look at your own fingernails, which millions of years ago were claws... Seriously, do you think God "designed" them? What possible function would they serve? Unbelievable....

I sense a "Jaywalk" interview in the future...

Yes I do. Philosophers and theologians may theorize end-lessly about good and evil; they can never reach universal agreement because no decisive test will distinguish truth from fallacy. F(*& that. people who actually need a formula to prove/disprove God are not even worth the effort. Believe what you want. Time will prove you wrong.

14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness," 2TH 2:10-12.

Genetisists have reviewed the DNA of dogs and found that they ALL come from the same animal...The Wolf

that was 200,000 years ago. How the hell can u explaint he evolution of all the different dogs we have in the time-frame of 200,000 years? Especially when only the Alpha's of the Wolves are the only ones who reproduce. And any genetic mutation from the wolves, are usually left weak, or die, and the wolves sense the weak and leave the to die.

200,000 years for all the different dogs we have. Give me a break. It wasn't evolution.

I find this very Egocentric.
The same as Christians believing that the earth is the center of the Universe.
What of the world outside the Christian Bias?
Like Gazrok states.
It only seems to be Christians that have a problem with Evolution, and Homosexuality, and make the rest of the world suffer.
Deep

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
I find this very Egocentric.
The same as Christians believing that the earth is the center of the Universe.
What of the world outside the Christian Bias?
Like Gazrok states.
It only seems to be Christians that have a problem with Evolution, and Homosexuality, and make the rest of the world suffer.
Deep

Deep: What a load of BS. Dont go saying it's mainly christians this and that. Dont talk #.

All ur doing is putting blame on a certain group of people.

MicroEvolution has been proved.MacroEvolutionhas not.

If youcan prove that All the dogs in the world "Evolved" in just 200,000 years from one animal...the Wolf...Then go ahead.

Noone else can seem to. Dog's just appeared. But they all came from the wolf. It seems ridiculous that anyone can actually suggest and say that all the dogs we have have evolved from into what thety were...a wolf...int he small time scale of 200,000 years.

It is mainly Christians that have this view.
My religion has never had any problems with Homosexuals and Evolution.
Deep

why is it that i can go to a museum & see a full sized T-rex yet theres no man/ape exibit?
There is no physical evidence of a missing link yet the THEORY of man evolution is taught to kids that cant tie their own shoes yet. for that let me be the first to tell everyone that timetravel to the past is practical & true because I say it is & because it sounds possible.

u really believe that man came from MONKEYS?
that we were swinging from trees?
when did this supposedly happen? did an ape give birth to a human? surely there had to be A DAY that monkeys changed, a day where the change actually took place. think about it, the argument is that it took extensive amount of years to develop, but thats just said so you cant make an argument against it. there still had to be offspring that came from monkey female that looks like some sort of human. doesnt seem feeseable. and if thats somehow remotely possible, then why do monkeys still live in trees, unchanged for all this time evolution supposedly took place?

some people are just infatuated with planet of the apes, its scary.

TRUESABBATH
themindofaHUMAN

Evolution occurs over time.
You think some Chimp just bore a human, though at times I believe that was the case with Bush.
Just as Dinosoars Evolved over time.
The evidence is thier, thier is no evidence that the Christian God created Man, other than what is written in scriptures.
Deep

[Edited on 1-12-2003 by ZeroDeep]

Originally posted by DaRAGE
Genetisists have reviewed the DNA of dogs and found that they ALL come from the same animal...The Wolf

that was 200,000 years ago. How the hell can u explaint he evolution of all the different dogs we have in the time-frame of 200,000 years? Especially when only the Alpha's of the Wolves are the only ones who reproduce. And any genetic mutation from the wolves, are usually left weak, or die, and the wolves sense the weak and leave the to die.

200,000 years for all the different dogs we have. Give me a break. It wasn't evolution.

All of the dogs are still of the same species. A poodle can breed with a rotweiler. The reason there are so many different sorts of dogs, is because of human intervention and of unnatural selection (the weak also survive).


Check these out...

People have developed many new varieties of plants and animals by selective breeding. This process is similar to the bacteria experiment described above. Selection of specimens to breed based on particular traits is, in effect, changing the environment for the population. Those individuals lacking the desirable characteristics are not allowed to breed. Therefore, the following generations more commonly have the desired traits.

Species that mature and reproduce large numbers in a short amount of time have a potential for very fast evolutionary changes. Insects and microorganisms often evolve at such rapid rates that our actions to combat them quickly lose their effectiveness. We must constantly develop new pesticides, antibiotics, and other measures in an ever escalating biological arms race with these creatures. Unfortunately, there are a few kinds of insects and microbes that are now significantly or completely resistant to our counter measures, and some of these species are responsible for devastating crop losses and deadly diseases.

If evolution has occurred, there should be many anatomical similarities among varieties and species that have diverged from a common ancestor. Those species with the most recent common ancestor should share the most traits. The fact that wolves, dogs, and other members of the genus Canis are anatomically very similar, for instance, is due to the fact that they are descended from the same ancient canine species. Wolves and dogs also share similarities with foxes, indicating a slightly more distant ancestor with them.



anthro.palomar.edu...

Why don�t we see evolution in the making?
If evolution is so common, why doesn�t it happen in front of our very eyes?". If you open your eyes, you�ll see that indeed it does!! Here are some examples. You might have heard that it is becoming increasingly difficult to cure bacterial and viral infections of all sorts, from tuberculosis to aids. This is because scientists use chemical weapons to destroy the infective agents (such as antibiotics). This in turn generates strong selection in favor of those random variants of bacteria and viruses that happen to be resistant (or that are not completely killed) by the antibiotic or drug. These resistant strains will then multiply and become extremely common, simply because they are better adapted to the new environment created by the use of drugs. A similar example is provided by insects that are becoming resistant to the use of pesticides, thereby making it more difficult to protect our crops. Have you ever owned a pet? Most pets, especially dogs, but also cats, horses, fishes, and birds, have been incessantly and dramatically modified by artificial selection, the human analogue of natural selection. Do you enjoy eating big ears of corn or different variety of rice? Or perhaps you like that new type of tomato that just showed up at your grocery store. Well, these are more examples of artificial selection.

Has anybody ever observed the birth of a new species?
If Darwin�s book was called "On the origin of species", how come we have not observed the birth of a single new species? Again, this claim is simply not true. Even though the different races of dogs that we produced by artificial selection are just variations on the same theme, a dog is nevertheless no longer a wolf, the distinct species from which domesticated dogs originally derived. Biologists have been able to recreate in the laboratory species of plants which were hypothesized to have originated by natural hybridization, precisely by crossing the putative natural parents. Also, there are several observations published so far of incipient species, i.e., of species in the making. In these cases we can actually demonstrate that these populations of animals or plants do not strictly belong to a known species, yet are not entirely a new species either.


fp.bio.utk.edu...
inbio.byu.edu...&data/pdf_files/1997/dogorigin97.pdf