Can you prove evolution wrong

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Quadrivium
Colin,
Do you remember the conversation we started way back when I joined this thread? Must have been back in the early 150's. Those were the good ol' days, lol.

Anyway,
I know that many people just take the Bible as a book of fairytales.
I wish they could see it through my eyes.
Science is actually proving the Creation story in Genesis.
Complex life on earth in the order that they more than likly appeared.
1. Plants
2. Fish and birds (the evidence is starting to show this)
3. Complex life on land.
4. Humans.
This is of course an abbreviated chain of events but compare it to what biology teaches.
See any resemblences?
Yet this book was written at least 2500 years ago.
Quad

QUAD...let me ask you something? Since it has been all over the news now and even though this same project was done in the 70's with sucess in the U.S....Political thinking thought it was too much for the masses but now over 5 labs have repeated the procedure and achieved GENESIS...that being life from lifelessness...and
Hundreds more labs over the world are repeating the procedure.

Now that this is out in the open...what is your current position on EVOLUTION? Split Infinity

Split,
I does not change my views at all. If it's true (proof please) it would confirm life can be created.

reply to post by Quadrivium

Of course it is created...by an Evolutionary Process. In the lab case...we just put all the conditions and enviroment and materials that we figured would be naturaly occuring in enviroment and Geology and chemestry...and bam! LIFE!

The same conditions Billions of years ago did the same thing. Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

Of course it is created...by an Evolutionary Process. In the lab case...we just put all the conditions and enviroment and materials that we figured would be naturaly occuring in enviroment and Geology and chemestry...and bam! LIFE!

The same conditions Billions of years ago did the same thing. Split Infinity

Also, I think it's important to mention that the complex organic molecules that make up all know life in the lab and in nature are abundant throughout the universe in unimaginable quantities and are in fact being created by star systems as we speak.

reply to post by flyingfish

This is true...also every Element heavier than Hydrogen and Helium was created either within the Thermonuclear High Gravity Well of a Star or in the case of very heavy Elements...they are created by Supernova.
Split Infinity

What if it's both creationism and evolution? What if a supreme entity(a GOD) creates things and then let's evolution take over. What if this supreme being put rules for this universe in place for life to form and evolve? This is something most never think about, what if it's all designed with a concept from the beginning and then left alone to see how it transpires? I believe there is a supreme being and it's sole function is to create things. It merely creates a lifeforms and then steps away and moves on to create another one. I think this supreme being observes what is needed and then supplies that need and doesn't interfere. If it survives it does and if it dies then it dies.

This would make sense as you can think for a moment that the earth a tone point had dinosaurs and then they died and we now use their dead tissue as oil. Everything seems to have a purpose and is left to evolve from the creation.

So it's both!

reply to post by TWISTEDWORDS


I suppose this is possible but what created the god? Man?

reply to post by flyingfish


I don't think its a GOD like we all think of it. I think there are 3 things and they are positive energy, negative energy and neutral. I think the GOD figure is the positive energy that creates things, the negative energy destroys things and the neutral combines them. We see it in nature all around us all the time. I don't think there is this GOD that sits around like a human and observes. I think it;s purpose is to simply create and if needed create more. The negative energy job is to destroy and keep it all in balance. So with all of this we end up with the evolution of living and dying(creating/destroying). It's all around us and all the time. So we see evolution taking place over time.

Originally posted by TWISTEDWORDS
What if it's both creationism and evolution? What if a supreme entity(a GOD) creates things and then let's evolution take over. What if this supreme being put rules for this universe in place for life to form and evolve? This is something most never think about, what if it's all designed with a concept from the beginning and then left alone to see how it transpires? I believe there is a supreme being and it's sole function is to create things. It merely creates a lifeforms and then steps away and moves on to create another one. I think this supreme being observes what is needed and then supplies that need and doesn't interfere. If it survives it does and if it dies then it dies.

This would make sense as you can think for a moment that the earth a tone point had dinosaurs and then they died and we now use their dead tissue as oil. Everything seems to have a purpose and is left to evolve from the creation.

So it's both!

I have been saying all along that there is no conflict in the Fact of Evolution and ones belief in GOD. If there is a GOD then he used the Evolutionary process to create life on Earth as well as anywhere else in the Universe or Multiverse...it is also possible there is no GOD or any GOD in the conventional sense as that is what I believe.

Also....99.999999% of all fossil fuels were created from ancient PLANT MATTER. Split Infinity

reply to post by idmonster

I tried making a similar point earlier in this thread by saying that, in general, every offspring is the same species as its parents, meaning that the minor genetic changes that occur between parent and offspring can result in speciation when aggregated over time. But, of course, this fell on deaf ears. Creationists continue to prove that they don't understand what they're so vehemently arguing against by asking to see proof that that a chimp gave birth to a human.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

Of course it is created...by an Evolutionary Process. In the lab case...we just put all the conditions and enviroment and materials that we figured would be naturaly occuring in enviroment and Geology and chemestry...and bam! LIFE!

The same conditions Billions of years ago did the same thing. Split Infinity

Once again, proof please.
Or is this one of those things that you have seen and really shouldn't be talking about?

reply to post by iterationzero



I don't think anyone means it that way. Even I understand that it would have taken several lineages to complete that. Anyone that does mean a chimp giving birth to a human has surly not done any reading on evolutionism.
Still I argue its not possible with a plethora of phases.

Everything you guys have sent me in links, that I have read make it clear that the only observations made were viruses and bacteria, and only small changes. In other words, they watched the flu change, but they still had a flu strain when done. No one has ever witnessed a species changing into another species.

We also have no connecting fossils and bones that tie any two species together from the 5 million here on earth.
There is no bones, no fossils, no observation, and no proof that this happens outside of viruses and bacteria.

Everything else I was directed to read was introduced as a hypothetical or postulated theory. Of course when I see people believing in such nonsense, I automatically think of religion. There is no difference, except that religion at least is supported with documentation.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Then obviously you have not read what we have been posting. Numerous times now we have posted links that discuss speciation events. For example you still have not responded to the story I have told you about the goatsbeard numerous times now. You also clearly did not look up Drosophilia like I instructed you to do. Furthermore, if speciation can occur in bacteria what is the mechanism that prevents it from occurring in larger organisms?

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Then obviously you have not read what we have been posting. Numerous times now we have posted links that discuss speciation events. For example you still have not responded to the story I have told you about the goatsbeard numerous times now. You also clearly did not look up Drosophilia like I instructed you to do. Furthermore, if speciation can occur in bacteria what is the mechanism that prevents it from occurring in larger organisms?

Well I specifically remember replying to the goatsbeard, the drosophilia, I don't remember. As far as the mechanism that prevents it from occurring in larger organisms is probably the same one that allows it to happen at all, its species.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Drosophilia

It's a fruit fly, and I don't know what you were asking about it.

reply to post by itsthetooth


The genus Drosophilia has probably produced more research specimens than any other. As a result a number of speciaition events have been witnessed with them.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Then if you remember the goatsbeard that means you were intentionally lying. It is a clear case of speciation yet you just said that speciaition has never been witnessed.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

Then if you remember the goatsbeard that means you were intentionally lying. It is a clear case of speciation yet you just said that speciaition has never been witnessed.

I also read the Wiki on speciation. Just because some small changes occur within a species, does not prove evolution. Speciation is nothing more than changes that would have been allowed within that species to begin with.
We have no way to prove that its just normal changes within that speicies.
Did the species convert into another species? No, so its still the same species right? Your fooling yourself.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

The genus Drosophilia has probably produced more research specimens than any other. As a result a number of speciaition events have been witnessed with them.

But it always was, and still is just a fruit fly right? There might be some small allowable changes, like I explained before, you might find a human with purple eyes, how do we not know that purple eyes are one normal option with our eye color that has just never come up before? We don't.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster

 

This is how evolution works, tiny differences over vast periods of time

I don't think I would call the differences between us and aps, little.

I assume you mean apes as in gorrillas, chimps etc.

Back to the little thought exercise.

If you were to perform that experiment with us, you would eventualy come to an APE LIKE creature.

Perform the same experiment with a chimp, and you would eventualy come to an APE LIKE creature.

Compare the two rows of photographs, somewhere along our line, and somewehere along the chimps line, would be the same APE LIKE creature.

Remeber the timescales involved, MILLIONS of years. Remember nobody claims the humans evolved from apes. All of this you are thouroughly aware of.

Stop pretending to be so dense, I've read your other posts, I've appreciated your musical creaticvity and I've seen your linked in profile. I know your not stupid, which leads me to the conclusion that this is just sport for you.

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by TWISTEDWORDS

 

I suppose this is possible but what created the god? Man?

edit on 25-1-2012 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)

Absolutely, its in the bible, it clearly states that man created god in his image.