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.
Originally posted by taderhold
reply to post by MrXYZ
Thus the reason for my request to provide an explanation of how they could illustrate speciation -- the most fundamental process in Darwin’s theory of evolution -- in a lab or or with any other valid scientific method. I suspect they cannot. Speciation has never been observed in real time.Again, I ask any of those posters, which are always asking for the science to support ID, to provide an example of speciation by any scientific method without relying on links to Wikipedia. If they cannot, does that mean that evolution is not supported by science? Of course not.
We have several plausible models of how speciation occurs—but of course, it’s hard for us to get an eye-witness account of a natural speciation event since most of these events happened in the distant past. We can figure out that speciation events happened and often when they happened, but it’s more difficult to figure out how they happened.
I know I will be perceived to be an ID freak because of this post, however, I am not. I am extremely interested in the debate, but not presumptuous enough to think that I know the origins of life on earth. And will continue the debate as long as it does not get too sarcastic or petty.
I'm not religious, but theory that states everything became to existence exploding from nothing (nothing exploded, get it?) and the nature rules somehow accidentally applied after, sounds ridiculous as something like tornado sweeping through a junkyard creating fully functional Boeing 747...
not much different than belief in some angry white bearded grandfather on heavens scaring his children with a thunder...
Originally posted by Barcs
I'm not religious, but theory that states everything became to existence exploding from nothing (nothing exploded, get it?) and the nature rules somehow accidentally applied after, sounds ridiculous as something like tornado sweeping through a junkyard creating fully functional Boeing 747...
not much different than belief in some angry white bearded grandfather on heavens scaring his children with a thunder...
This has nothing to do with ID, and is completely wrong to boot. Use google and at least learn the basics of a scientific theory before spewing ignorance that has absolutely nothing to do with ID or evolution. That is one of the worst comparisons I've ever read, and believe me I've heard tons of em. Put down the Hovind videos and pick up an actual science book.edit on 6-2-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by donhuangenaro
well, and I have not ever met more arrogant person in my life (believe me, I've seen them a lot)...
but theory that states everything became to existence exploding from nothing (nothing exploded, get it?)
tornado sweeping through a junkyard creating fully functional Boeing 747
no matter, you asked for the scientific proof, here is a very simple comparison between a mouse neural cell and a simulated map of the universe:
is this also result of coincidental evolution or does it point to some kind of 'design' behind everything we know?
is this also result of coincidental evolution or does it point to some kind of 'design' behind everything we know?
Originally posted by vasaga
If Intelligent Design is so dead, why are you so busy killing it all the time, among a bunch of scientists who are constantly in a war to kill it?
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by donhuangenaro
is this also result of coincidental evolution or does it point to some kind of 'design' behind everything we know?
It is the result of matter obeying the same laws of physics on the cosmic as well as the microscopic scale, being moved in similar ways by similar (though not necessarily identical) forces, because that is how nature works. It results from the same processes that make a shoreline on Earth look similar at every scale from a satellite photo taken from thousand of miles up to a mobile-phone camera shot showing a few feet of seashore. It is the result of fractal patterns that take identical form on different levels of scale because the same equations of force, motion and friction apply on all those scales.
So it's not dead then?
Originally posted by HappyBunny
Originally posted by vasaga
If Intelligent Design is so dead, why are you so busy killing it all the time, among a bunch of scientists who are constantly in a war to kill it?
Because the political and religious machine keeps trying to resurrect it and impose it on our kids in schools?
Originally posted by vasaga
So it's not dead then?
Originally posted by HappyBunny
Originally posted by vasaga
If Intelligent Design is so dead, why are you so busy killing it all the time, among a bunch of scientists who are constantly in a war to kill it?
Because the political and religious machine keeps trying to resurrect it and impose it on our kids in schools?
Originally posted by vasaga
Mythology... HAHA. I would say philosophy.. Which is much needed. Scientists suck at philosophy nowadays.
Originally posted by vasaga
So it's not dead then?
Originally posted by HappyBunny
Originally posted by vasaga
If Intelligent Design is so dead, why are you so busy killing it all the time, among a bunch of scientists who are constantly in a war to kill it?
Because the political and religious machine keeps trying to resurrect it and impose it on our kids in schools?
Originally posted by vasaga
Mythology... HAHA. I would say philosophy.. Which is much needed. Scientists suck at philosophy nowadays.
Originally posted by taderhold
reply to post by Barcs
I do not want to move my debate to another thread. I am merely trying to illustrate that many of the posters, unlike you, are incoherent in their arguments. They attempt to impose upon anyone with an opposing view criteria which most of them, when asked to, cannot do themselves.
Adios. This is my last post on this thread.