Can you prove evolution wrong

reply to post by colin42

You really are a buffoon. Respond is what I asked you to do with the Ant v Human comparison so by responding here you have proved everything I have accussed you of to be correct.

So here you are. Responding to a post that contained no question marks. Something you claimed unable to do or understand when you could not answer the post relating to the similarities with human and Ants.

I can't believe you, your still trying to justify your lack of puncuation. OMG you will never just fess up and admit when your wrong even when everyone else is being silent on your behalf.

Go back to school dude, get off the pipe, and get some rest. There is no excuse for dancing around your own errors like this.

reply to post by colin42


Speaking of being a baffoon, is anyone going to man up and actually give an accurate answer on how a new species finds food? The only lame answer I have so far is they eat the same thing they used to.

Does anyone have anything factual on this, or is it made up like the rest of the theory?

reply to post by Connector


This is the only time I have ever missed the old "Ignore" feature. We could have saved ourselves 150 pages and months of answering the same questions over and over again.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

This is the only time I have ever missed the old "Ignore" feature. We could have saved ourselves 150 pages and months of answering the same questions over and over again.

Well thats what happens when you answer questions with an insufficiant answer.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Connector

 

This is the only time I have ever missed the old "Ignore" feature. We could have saved ourselves 150 pages and months of answering the same questions over and over again.

Agreed! so let's get back to the OP.........I'll re-post incase some have forgotten

Originally posted by colin42
I would like to pose a scenario.

Let's put all the evidence of evolution to one side for a spell. That Darwin and all that followed were mistaken as some maintain.

I would like the pro Evolution group (that includes me) to take a back seat and give the anti evolution group a chance to explain how life on this planet is the way it is now.

I am not asking how life started just an explanation of the diversity of life from the deep dark depths of the oceans to the blue skies above and pole to pole.

I would like an explanation of the fossil records but it is not essential.

As I say I would like the pro evolution group to resist comments for a while. My guess is there will be few takers but I may be suprised.

edit on Thu Sep 22 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: *misleading title, formerly was: Evolution proved 100% Wrong

I wish the mods hadn't changed the title, to me it's more mis-leading then the original as the question was to explain diversity across the globe, not evolution specifically.

colin?
Is it safe to come back in now?
If so, and you don't mind my asking, where did we leave off?

Edit to add;
I have read through the last few pages and I wish that some of my questions would have gotten as much attention as tooth's ( Then again, it could be a compliment that they didn't).

reply to post by Quadrivium
Hi Quad

Hope all is well now.

I think apart from a pest probably your post recieved few answers so as not to bother you during your recent troubles.

Originally posted by Quadrivium
reply to post by colin42

 

Colin, I do not believe you will find what you are looking for.
Not trying to shove you head first off of the rock, just trying to share it more evenly.
I have tried to do what you asked. But my beliefs run close with parts of evolution and it is almost impossible to explain without brushing the subject. I also try to speak in a way that you, being an evolutionist, will understand.
It gets hard to do this when you are constantly told "your wrong" or "your scenario is flawed" (mostly by others in the thread).
That just leads to me defending my beliefs by showing the flaws in yours.
So for discussions sake, I will try again.



I believe that All life on earth was created.
This was done in steps (days).

Step 1.( The bible does not state this but it does not deny it either)
The building blocks were formed in the form of microbial life.

Step 2. (day 3)
Plant life was created, with all of the nessasary information built in to create the diversity that we see today using adaptation.

Step 3. (day 4)
Complex marien life was created. As well as birds. These also had the built in information to adapt and speciate.
I have also showed evidence that birds may have been here before dinosaurs. This evidence did not come from Creation sources.

Step 4. (day 5)
Land animals were created. Their DNA was also filled with all of the information they would need to adapt.

Step 5 (day 6)
Creation of Man.


This is creation from the bible (except step 1). This is also a simple break down of the order biology and the fossil records show (with a contradiction on birds)
I say that's not too bad for a book atleast 2500 years old.

Colin,
I doubt if you will get anything more than this from a Creationist, it's not that they do not want to Answer, or that they can't answer (and this is the part many find difficult) but to us diversity began at creation. I do not agree with all Creationist on all things but we all agree on this.
I may believe we have adapted to what we are now but it all boils down to the
one statement evolutionist dislike............GOD DID IT.
peace brother,
Quad

Restart real discussion

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

Colin, I do not believe you will find what you are looking for.

I disagree. You have given me what I asked for. The very first one to do it to boot. Thanks.

You have explained why you need to include/brush up against evolution thats fine as you have justified the need. edit that sound pompus when it is meant to be being reasonable.

I believe that All life on earth was created.

No one knows how life started for sure. You maintain it was created by god you will get no argument from me as I have no real information that I can accept one way or the other.
One question for clarity. Days? 24 hour days or days representing stages?

Step 1.( The bible does not state this but it does not deny it either)
The building blocks were formed in the form of microbial life.

Still do not see an issue. A house brick has the potential to build a garden wall, house, in fact anything. I have already agreed that I have no idea why or how life started I think I can easily agree that early microbial life had the potential to produce diversity. You could probably describe the formation of the universe in the same fashion and not be incorrect.

Step 2. (day 3)
Plant life was created, with all of the nessasary information built in to create the diversity that we see today using adaptation.

We may have to work at staying on the rock from here but I am sure we can manage.

I think we can see enough evidence when we look at the night sky that the universe, galaxies, stars, planets form over time from the building blocks created by the 'big event'. (avoided big bang, big inflation and big creation). I am not even sure you can seperate life from the rest of the universe because if that never formed over time then life would have no where to evolve or be created.

It appears to be a universal truth. That given time and small changes (dust forming all we are and know) the universe formed. We are learning everyday about the complexity and diversity of the universe and it appears no less complex than life on this planet.

I think I have made enough points. Your turn. There is plenty of time to work through the days.

Thanks again. I've waited 206 pages for this debate to begin.

edit on 29-1-2012 by colin42 because: had too

Originally posted by Quadrivium

One question for clarity. Days? 24 hour days or days representing stages?

Not sure. There are four basic views among Creationist.
These views are:
the Calendar Day interpretation
the Day-Age interpretation
the Framework interpretation
and the Analogical Days interpretation

I think we can see enough evidence when we look at the night sky that the universe, galaxies, stars, planets form over time from the building blocks created by the 'big event'. (avoided big bang, big inflation and big creation). I am not even sure you can seperate life from the rest of the universe because if that never formed over time then life would have no where to evolve or be created.

Can't argue with that. Days 1-4 deal with the creation of the universe, while days 3-6 deal with the creation of life.

It appears to be a universal truth. That given time and small changes (dust forming all we are and know) the universe formed. We are learning everyday about the complexity and diversity of the universe and it appears no less complex than life on this planet.

Not sure how small the changes were in the beginning but I agree that the universe is very complex, and what we think we know is just a drop of knowledge in a vast sea yet to learn.
You know, the bible states Adam was formed from dust (lol, had to throw that in).

Thanks again. I've waited 206 pages for this debate to begin.

I Do not mean to sound rude Colin but I stated this about 50 pages ago

Quad

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

I did respond to that post but you arrived just as someone else infested the thread. There was also a one off post by someone offering emanation as an alternative two good posts lost to the madness of one. We have reached a little quiet so lets use it.

The length of a day. I am aware that there are a few interpretations of what a day means in the book. From my perspective that is really annoying. When I am told the bible holds all the answers and yet I cannot find out if a day is 24 hours, an age or an analogy I hope you can understand the frustration it causes especially when evolution is charged with being full of assumptions. To a person with a brain wired my way that is Irritating , very Irritating.

Religion holds its gods to be eternal so time means nothing to an eternal being so I will assume 1 day to be an analogy. Calenders are definitely man made.

1 Day = 1 Day and then you have major problems. From the stars we observe forming. Supernovas and all the stages between. The geology of this planet all point to a slow formation over billions of years.

On a cosmological scale planets are the micro evolution and galaxies the macro. Is it so far fetched that everywhere we look small changes over time result in the formation of complex and astounding diversity?

The bibles of this world have changed/been translated/interpreted many times and sourced from many older religions is it so unbelievable that ancient peoples that studied the stars would be unable to observe and reason a very similar story to the one we can all see today?

I read something that has stuck with me from a physicist. Every time we answer a question we discover many more questions because of it. I hope that is always the case.

Originally posted by Quadrivium

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

The length of a day. I am aware that there are a few interpretations of what a day means in the book. From my perspective that is really annoying. When I am told the bible holds all the answers and yet I cannot find out if a day is 24 hours, an age or an analogy I hope you can understand the frustration it causes especially when evolution is charged with being full of assumptions. To a person with a brain wired my way that is Irritating , very Irritating.

Well I hold to the 1 day = an age view myself.
The reason I say this is due to what is written in the Bible.
It is only on day four that He actually gives the term "day" any meaning.

“Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years

On a cosmological scale planets are the micro evolution and galaxies the macro. Is it so far fetched that everywhere we look small changes over time result in the formation of complex and astounding diversity?

This is why I am a believer colin, the result of the complex and astounding diversity. With out Outside help how could what we see all around us ever come to be? I truly can not believe it "just happened".

The bibles of this world have changed/been translated/interpreted many times and sourced from many older religions is it so unbelievable that ancient peoples that studied the stars would be unable to observe and reason a very similar story to the one we can all see today?

As far as the bible being changed.........we have the dead sea scrolls and other writtings that show it has changed very little in the past 2000 years.
Studying stars? Sure they could come to the same conclusions. We see that in many of the ancient peoples, especially the myans.
But to write down the order in which we see life come about through biology and the fossil records?.......hmm not so much.

I read something that has stuck with me from a physicist. Every time we answer a question we discover many more questions because of it. I hope that is always the case.

I believe we will always have more question than answers, at least while we're here.
Quad

Hopefully I did not miss anything if so please correct.

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

Day 3 is then an age. Algea mats then the first plants but invertabrates at least are also found at this time in the fossil records is my understanding which is a full 2 days early going by your list. So it appears the building blocks of life we discussed earlier were already diversifying into the groups we know today.

I wont hold you to your list rigidly as I see that as being unfair but by day 2 we have a difference of opinion. Still does not mean leaving the rock (that has lichens on BTW). I have just been re reading your points and see your comment agreeing with my point. See how many things we agree on. In a thread on ATS about origins that is unbelievable

I did not think there were many people that could read the dead sea scrolls and wonder how many versions were interpreted from them but you are definitely the expert in this field so I will not press the point unless you want to witness me falling asleep on the rock.

This is why I am a believer colin, the result of the complex and astounding diversity. With out Outside help how could what we see all around us ever come to be? I truly can not believe it "just happened".

Like I said one see's the works of a creator and the other see's the work of nature.

Cause and affect. I sneeze on a train, everyone on it gets a cold. What started the universe in motion again no one is an expert, you pay your money and take your choice. Once started the universe evolved just like everything else.

Like peeling an onion. Each layer is seperate and distinct but its onion all the way in.

I'm going to try for a little humor here, since it's appropriate:

doonesbury.com...

The main issue I see with the creation story being interpreted in stages, is that it shows god is not all powerful as claimed in the bible. I agree that it is certainly a more realistic viewpoint than 6 literal days, since we know for a fact that Dinosaurs ruled 65+ million years ago and that humans have only been around for a few hundred thousands years (less than 1 second of geological time when looking at the earth's history as a whole). So god or whichever creator, spent 2 billion years creating various creatures and lifeforms to rule the earth for millions and millions of years, that appear to have evolved from one another, until he finally got to humans 200,000 years ago. What does this say about a creator (s)? To me is says that he/she/they are not all powerful, and have a ton of time to waste. I just don't see a creator being involved on that level, when not omnipotent. It doesn't make sense. If the creator is all powerful, then they set up the system of evolution to do the work for them. It's only logical way it is possible, because the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. Humans are the most intelligent, but they certainly aren't unique to other life on this planet. The idea of creating tons of pointless creatures that are almost identical to the previous ones over billions of years, seems a little bit redundant for a guy that supposedly created the entire universe.

reply to post by Barcs


There isn't anything that says our species started just 200,000 years ago.

reply to post by Barcs
Not swapping sides here but:

If you swap all powerful for eternal then time does not become a problem as I would imagine time has no meaning to somthing eternal. It only affects those that have a begining and end. It could be we are inside the machine looking at it being constructed.

In fact given eternity to play with does the creative force even have to be all powerful? Water can do amazingly powerful things given time but you would not call it all powerful in a bucket.

Time after all is a major component in evolution.

So I really have no problem with a creator using evolution as a tool. My problem/question lays with those that deny evolution. They must have an explanation for the diversity we see and I am interested in what that is

reply to post by colin42


Well you had asked me long ago, and I realized some other methods that could explain diversity.
A giant chemical spill could explain diversity.
A giant radiation event could also explain diversity.
So could the likes of a creator explain diversity.

There must be more as I believe that none of these were responsible.