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.

 

butterfly evolves over 6 year time period

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I watched a documentary the other day on Creation VS Evolution. I thought it was going to be factual on both sides, but unfortunately it was a Christian made documentary so it was very biased. I still watched it cause i like to keep an open mind on these things, but they raised one point that kind of made me think a little, and their is probably a simple explanation for it that i am unaware of. Where are all the fossils of species that are evolving over time? Have these been found and is this documentary just lying. I'm really curious about this.




posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:02 PM
link   
There are literally squillions of fossils out there. And a thing to remember about evolution is that it is gradual.

You don't have one minute a dinosaur, who then gives birth to a bird.

If the Christian/Creationists believe this, then they haven't even attempted to understand the other side of the argument.

See my post earlier on for a simple run down of how evolution works.

I am still amazed that people don't buy it. It is really simple to understand and is much more likely than "God did it".



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Oh, alright. Just the way they worded it was weird. They claimed that no fossils have ever been found that credit towards evolution. Sort of like a link in between species.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by WinoBot
Oh, alright. Just the way they worded it was weird. They claimed that no fossils have ever been found that credit towards evolution. Sort of like a link in between species.


Nope, thar be plenty!

A walk along the beach where there is slate, or other sedimentary rocks will usually yield dozens of fossils. And I'm no paleontologist!



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumasonThere are literally squillions of fossils out there. And a thing to remember about evolution is that it is gradual.


Except for the Cambrian Explosion, many phylum just 'appeared' in geological time. That one evolution can not explain.

Genetic Mutations that are kept when we know that 99% of the time the mutation is detrimental?

To the person asking questions above, don't take ANYONES word for it, do the research yourself, look at the way evolution is supposed to work and then try and make it match irreducible complexity.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Genetic Mutations that are kept when we know that 99% of the time the mutation is detrimental?


That is very well likely. But in that 1% where the mutation benefits the organism, it can gain that edge and flourish. If 99% of genetic mutation invariably conferred an advantage, then there would probably be no life, as all the different animals wouldn't be able to breed with each other.


Originally posted by edsinger
To the person asking questions above, don't take ANYONES word for it, do the research yourself, look at the way evolution is supposed to work and then try and make it match irreducible complexity.


Indeed. Good advice.

I personally see evolution as a simple to understand process and is the most likely explanation. Others seem unable to get their heads round it, for whatever reason.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Indeed. Good advice.

I personally see evolution as a simple to understand process and is the most likely explanation. Others seem unable to get their heads round it, for whatever reason.


Fair enough I guess.

I am looking into the micro now instead of the macro so to speak. the stuff I am learning such as the complexity of the eye for one. It is just amazing to think that evolution could explain it, I think not in my opinion.

Also, digging into quantum mechanics, the stuff that we don't know and just how it ties in to how things work it not explainable that way in my opinion.

Even if not a Christian, I would at least consider the evidence to support a designer at the minimum. I am an engineer by trade and I see design everywhere in nature.

[edit on 17-7-2007 by edsinger]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   
To be honest, I don't rule out some element of design, but I don't necessarily equate it into my thinking either.

I am also an an engineer in telecoms, so I do see what you mean. One thing that always bothers me about life though is some major components lack redundancy, so that to me acts as a counterweight to a "designer" sometimes.

Personally, I think humanity itself may have had a designer, although not a "divine" one, even if life as a whole didn't. But we'd veer off on a tangent if we went into that.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Personally, I think humanity itself may have had a designer, although not a "divine" one, even if life as a whole didn't. But we'd veer off on a tangent if we went into that.


True but in just science, the universal constants being exactly where they need to be is to me not an accident.

I am on a journey to find the answer...




top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join