Evolution and Creationism is easy as math.

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
So what, where did the DNA come from. It needs an explanation, not just the obvious statement it exists.

But you don't need an explanation to manipulate it. It exists even without the explanation.


If we dont understand how they work how do we explain anything.
Putting the cart before the horse to justify the argument.

Wrongly, till you get it right. Yes, it is putting the cart before the horse, but that is the way it happens whether it is to your liking or not.


Breeding species was inter special, to suggest that is irrelevant, a silly argument akin to my fridge evolving when I turn it off.

I don't even know what you are trying to say here. Breeding as in plant breeding is estimated to go back thousands of years and sure sounds like genetic manipulation to me.


Classical plant breeding uses deliberate interbreeding (crossing) of closely or distantly related individuals to produce new crop varieties or lines with desirable properties. Plants are crossbred to introduce traits/genes from one variety or line into a new genetic background.



Well good, if you can grasp that without a foundation, without other logical pieces in place, fine.
Your faith has made you strong in your chosen religion.

I already explained that it isn't faith because it could be trashed at any moment. Many theories have come about and been tossed aside when proven wrong. Nothing should be held sacred.

edit on 16-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch




Originally posted by daskakik

The building blocks are there even if you don't understand how they work. That is how selective breeding was used to manipulate DNA before anyone even knew it existed. The same way alchemists experimented without a periodic table.

DNA exists? What? No?

So what, where did the DNA come from. It needs an explanation, not just the obvious statement it exists.
If we dont understand how they work how do we explain anything.
Putting the cart before the horse to justify the argument.

Breeding species was inter special, to suggest that is irrelevant, a silly argument akin to my fridge evolving when I turn it off.



Originally posted by daskakik
That is what you can't seem to grasp. Science doesn't arrive at all the answers at the same time. Different theories address different parts of it and some are proven and go on to become laws and others end up being proven wrong and tossed out.


Well good, if you can grasp that without a foundation, without other logical pieces in place, fine.
Your faith has made you strong in your chosen religion.




So in other words, you are filling a gap in knowledge (we don't know how first life started) with magic, aka god. The typical old god of the gaps argument again


And of course evolution scientists can draw conclusions without understanding how first life started. If they see the same process happen thousands of times without being disproven once, it's logical to assume it's true. If you do DNA tests of ancient remains and learn that they are related, you can draw conclusions. If you examine hundreds of thousands of fossils and they ALL MATCH UP with the theory, it's logical to assume it's true. If you actively apply the theory (!!!) in modern medicine and IT WORKS, you can assume it's a sound theory.

We can't explain how the physical forces came to be (yet), but I don't see you complaining about airplanes not being possible because we can't understand gravity without it.

In short, you are an incredibly biased and, when it comes to science, uneducated guy who clearly shouldn't attach theories he doesn't understand. Open a biology book for crying out loud



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Well like the opening poster you go ahead and believe what others you assume cleverer than you teach you, , and accept verbatim what they tell you to accept.

I dont understand it or believe it, and if it comes down to faith in their beliefs, I will think otherwise.

The funny thing is you think I am gullible, yet you accept what they say by your faith in them.
edit on 16-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by borntowatch
So what, where did the DNA come from. It needs an explanation, not just the obvious statement it exists.

But you don't need an explanation to manipulate it. It exists even without the explanation.


If we dont understand how they work how do we explain anything.
Putting the cart before the horse to justify the argument.

Wrongly, till you get it right. Yes, it is putting the cart before the horse, but that is the way it happens whether it is to your liking or not.


Breeding species was inter special, to suggest that is irrelevant, a silly argument akin to my fridge evolving when I turn it off.

I don't even know what you are trying to say here. Breeding as in plant breeding is estimated to go back thousands of years and sure sounds like genetic manipulation to me.


Classical plant breeding uses deliberate interbreeding (crossing) of closely or distantly related individuals to produce new crop varieties or lines with desirable properties. Plants are crossbred to introduce traits/genes from one variety or line into a new genetic background.



Well good, if you can grasp that without a foundation, without other logical pieces in place, fine.
Your faith has made you strong in your chosen religion.

I already explained that it isn't faith because it could be trashed at any moment. Many theories have come about and been tossed aside when proven wrong. Nothing should be held sacred.

edit on 16-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


It is faith because so many accept it as fact



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
Well like the opening poster you go ahead and believe what others you assume cleverer than you teach you, , and accept verbatim what they tell you to accept.

I dont understand it or believe it, and if it comes down to faith in their beliefs, I will think otherwise.

The funny thing is you think I am gullible, yet you accept what they say by your faith in them.
edit on 16-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)


They back up their claims with objective evidence...the bible doesn't. Scientific method FORBIDS faith by its very definition. So no, you can't compare creationism with science, especially if the book you base your belief on is DEMONSTRABLY WRONG in hundreds of cases.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by borntowatch
So what, where did the DNA come from. It needs an explanation, not just the obvious statement it exists.

But you don't need an explanation to manipulate it. It exists even without the explanation.


If we dont understand how they work how do we explain anything.
Putting the cart before the horse to justify the argument.

Wrongly, till you get it right. Yes, it is putting the cart before the horse, but that is the way it happens whether it is to your liking or not.


Breeding species was inter special, to suggest that is irrelevant, a silly argument akin to my fridge evolving when I turn it off.

I don't even know what you are trying to say here. Breeding as in plant breeding is estimated to go back thousands of years and sure sounds like genetic manipulation to me.


Classical plant breeding uses deliberate interbreeding (crossing) of closely or distantly related individuals to produce new crop varieties or lines with desirable properties. Plants are crossbred to introduce traits/genes from one variety or line into a new genetic background.



Well good, if you can grasp that without a foundation, without other logical pieces in place, fine.
Your faith has made you strong in your chosen religion.

I already explained that it isn't faith because it could be trashed at any moment. Many theories have come about and been tossed aside when proven wrong. Nothing should be held sacred.

edit on 16-10-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)


It is faith because so many accept it as fact


Er, no, that's ridiculous. Fallacy of relevance. Faith isn't based on fact by its very definition. However many people accept it is irrelevant because they base their conclusions on something other than faith.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
Whale legs, are you that brainwashed, that ignorant of biology you think there whale legs.

Next you will say the coxic has no value in the human body, please have yours removed, see if its vestigial.

Find out what muscles are attached to these bones, this will give you two answers.
The first dealing with how brainwashed you are to the truth re whale structure, the second as to how gullible you are to phony science..

If they have no use why are these bones fundamentaly important to the whales existence.

and further are you saying big fat whales use to walk around on the ground, whats the tail for, what food did they eat, why did they need such big lungs if they were ground dwellers. Where are the rest of the vestigial organs.

This is absurd

My fridge is getting warmer, must see if its evolving legs, should I tie it down?


I have this theory that watermelons grow in clouds, evidently watermelons are 99.2% water and clouds are 100% water. Logical isnt it
edit on 14-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)


Are you aware that whales and other marine mammals evolved from LAND animals, and not the other way around?

Whales have hip bones, you know.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
The pelvic bones of whales serve as attachments for the musculature associated with the penis in males and its homologue, the clitoris, in females. The muscle involved is known as the ischiocavernosus and is quite a powerful muscle in males. It serves as a retractor muscle for the penis in copulation and probably provides the base for lateral movements of the penis. The mechanisms of penile motion are not well understood in whales. The penis seems to be capable of a lot of independent motion, much like the trunk of an elephant. How much of this is mediated by the ischiocavernosus is not known.

Explain to us why it's not like this with fish, i.e. why whales have hip bones but fish don't?



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by borntowatch
The pelvic bones of whales serve as attachments for the musculature associated with the penis in males and its homologue, the clitoris, in females. The muscle involved is known as the ischiocavernosus and is quite a powerful muscle in males. It serves as a retractor muscle for the penis in copulation and probably provides the base for lateral movements of the penis. The mechanisms of penile motion are not well understood in whales. The penis seems to be capable of a lot of independent motion, much like the trunk of an elephant. How much of this is mediated by the ischiocavernosus is not known.

Explain to us why it's not like this with fish, i.e. why whales have hip bones but fish don't?


Explain why you still think its a vestigial organ



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by borntowatch
The pelvic bones of whales serve as attachments for the musculature associated with the penis in males and its homologue, the clitoris, in females. The muscle involved is known as the ischiocavernosus and is quite a powerful muscle in males. It serves as a retractor muscle for the penis in copulation and probably provides the base for lateral movements of the penis. The mechanisms of penile motion are not well understood in whales. The penis seems to be capable of a lot of independent motion, much like the trunk of an elephant. How much of this is mediated by the ischiocavernosus is not known.

Explain to us why it's not like this with fish, i.e. why whales have hip bones but fish don't?

Never mind that, explain why a creator would create a sea creature that breathes AIR



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by borntowatch
 


You did not address "so many" you made it personal by saying:


Your faith has made you strong in your chosen religion.


But I'm sure that if some breakthrough is made and others can verify that evolution according to Darwin is wrong "so many" would have no problem dropping Darwin's theory. If the grave of Christ was found with remains inside would Christians drop the belief that Christ died and rose from the dead after 3 days?

I don't think they would. That is the difference.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Love how borntowatch pretends science is a religion while religion is somehow fact. Must be a funny fantasy land he lives in


A land where logic doesn't matter, a land where rationality gets thrown out of the window, a land where ignorance replaces the quest for knowledge, a land where fixed beliefs always override growing knowledge of reality...and all that in the 21st century, really sad....



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Haha! So now it's "without chemical evolution, biological evolution can't begin, so it's false". So if we can't prove abiogenesis it means it doesn't exist.
This is actually pretty comical.

Following that logic, without abiogenesis, big bang or chemical evolution we would not be discussing this on the internet right now, so by your logic, the internet does not exist either. If the internet doesn't exist, we don't exist and you are arguing with yourself. Have fun.
edit on 16-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
Haha! So now it's "without chemical evolution, biological evolution can't begin, so it's false". So if we can't prove abiogenesis it means it doesn't exist.
This is actually pretty comical.

Following that logic, without abiogenesis, big bang or chemical evolution we would not be discussing this on the internet right now, so by your logic, the internet does not exist either. If the internet doesn't exist, we don't exist and you are arguing with yourself. Have fun.
edit on 16-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



Science is repeatable observable and testable, the religious nature of your science is not. Its a religious faith in science.

Scientifically we shouldnt exist, thats the whole point. Did you just understand that???





posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Please everyone, allow me to elaborate on several details I promised that I would not go into, and I do so only to defend myself from being misunderstood.

My post was for those, like myself a mere 10 years ago, who were encapsulated by an imposed belief system that never seemed to confront any of the questions I found myself asking. I hated that I was punished by my peers for asking those questions. "You question the word of God?! - Blasphemer!"

I want to encourage those out there who are not satisfied with the stories they were told as a child, most of which made sense until... I dunno... I learned some common sense. I want to tell them that it is O.K. to think for yourself and ask simple questions such as:

-Why do dinosaurs not fit into the Bible? (I know some have tried to address it with chapters in Job that brings up variable translations of what he is really describing as a hippopotamus, but it is a dismal attempt)

-Why can math disprove the feasibility Noahs Ark?

-Why did angels, who have no gender because they don't reproduce, find women attractive and have sex with them, much like a human finding an ant or an amoeba attractive?

-Why do other religions have the same stories in different details, such as Moses?

-Why did God think it was cool to give Samson magical strength in his hair?

-Why is it impossible for Jonah to live in a whale, yet we are to believe it happened?

-Why did God go through all of this trouble of creating a universe with trillions upon trillions of suns and multiple worlds that are capable of sustaining life just for one measly world that had two immortal, imperfect humans who, instead of just populating the earth, would by mistake make it possible for people to now live in heaven?


I am not saying that there is no God. In fact I believe we were created. We were created by the laws of physics that allow for such sentient beings to form. I don't know why we were created and I don't know why the laws of physics work the way they do right now (however once the universe reaches a cooling phase beings such as ourselves will find it impossible to survive). And I doubt that by the time any of our ancestors do find out, they would appear anything like we do today.

Some people are afraid to venture their minds from the idea of monotheism to atheism. But I have to tell you my personal experience. I have been there and I feel so much more alive today than when I believed that I was going to live forever. Now I know that I am rare and a part of something much more natural and mysterious.

We have had the opportunity to live in an integral time of human civilization where much of the ancient form of thinking has still heavily influenced societies around the world. We have only begun piecing together the puzzle of life, but right now it is so fresh and exciting. Its only been a little over 100 years since Darwin died! That's within the lifetime of a human! Each and every one of us has the opportunity to become a piece of human history when his mind began to understand the fabric of space itself. That is as monumental as a fish knowing that it is inside of a fish bowl, and what material the bowl is made of.

Once you break the barrier of this type of thinking, the idea of sentient life becomes limitless. We are now discovering that, much like how the brain has waves of single points of consciousness that forms what we interpret as seamless, the entire world has proof of a single consciousness. That we are somehow all slightly connected together as if separate entities of the same living organism. I imagine that one day technology and human minds will become so intertwined that we may all have the ability to create a perfect single consciousness that we can all connect to at will. Perhaps beyond that, a universal mind.

And maybe that is the reason why we are forming, to place order in the universe and create within it a single living organism that becomes self aware. The possibilities are mind boggling and to me, much more fulfilling than believing that a single entity created us for no reason and then punishes us for acting in accord to the behaviors set within out genetic blue prints.

We all have at our fingertips the ability to search and understand quantum physics and string theory. We have seen the theory of the Higgs particle become a reality. We all have the opportunity to understand the secrets of the universe within a lifetime before we return to the ashes of the earth, the question is: will you squander it?



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
Science is repeatable observable and testable, the religious nature of your science is not. Its a religious faith in science.

For some it may be but not for others. I have already shown why the religious are religious and why the science minded are not like them. You have yet to make a valid argument but instead want to shove your belief down peoples throats.


Scientifically we shouldnt exist, thats the whole point. Did you just understand that???

Actually if that is true then you should be able to prove it, repeat it and have it made into law. Until you do it is no truer than any of the theories you claim to be wrong.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
Science is repeatable observable and testable, the religious nature of your science is not. Its a religious faith in science.

Scientifically we shouldnt exist, thats the whole point. Did you just understand that???


Says the guy who still refuses to address the scientific testable observable evidence and has demonstrated he doesn't even understand the very basics of the theory!
Just because you don't like the evidence and don't understand the science, doesn't mean it's wrong. It means you need to evolve your knowledge.

www.talkorigins.org...

I'll post this for the 2nd time. Please address the evidence. You are doing nothing but preaching. Keep that nonsense in a church where the people have already been indoctrinated and brainwashed and are more likely to buy it. Please demonstrate what in that link is based on faith.
edit on 17-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by borntowatch
 





Scientifically we shouldnt exist, thats the whole point. Did you just understand that???



But we know how humans evolved...you simply ignore it because it goes against your irrational (read: not backed up by evidence) faith that is often demonstrably wrong...like when it comes to that silly global flood. Your reaction to facts (!!) that disagree with your crazy belief is:



Parading ignorance like there's no tomorrow



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I fail to see the logic behind his argument and your support for it. If we are arguing creation versus big bang, which I did not because I was trying to support evolution and not the big bang, then I will rebuttal your logic and ask which is more sound. Which of these are more probable? Which of these sound like the most simple answer?

Poof! There is an all mighty being capable of creating the cosmos as we know it. Poof! We appeared on this earth somehow labeled seperate from other beasts however sharing with some 98% of their genetic make up. Poof! We have contact with the creator some 40, 000 years after modern man arrived. And poof! We have the ever changing Bible that documents our contact with this creator.

Or... Poof! The cosmos appeared from an unknown origin whos natural laws allow the tranformation of energy into atoms and atoms into particles and particles into structured beings.

I believe the real hang up most people have is when categorizing life and conciousness. I think we overestimate these thresholds we make for these ideas. I will put them into perspective for you.

What is intelligence? The assimilation of knowledge of your surrounding environment and the actions taken as a result. Does a plant not do this? Its leaves search for light and roots for nutrients. How can this occur without a brain?

Intelligence to me would be knowing what is outside of our universe. How can you say you have knowledge when you know what is already here. The sun will be the sun weather or not anyone knows it is there. Even if we took all of the knowledge we had of the universe and put a number of how much we know of the knowable the amount wiuld be a small percent. One could say we have discovered, understood, and documented say 15% of all the laws and mathematics required to recreate the universe.

You think we have intelligence? We have but an amoeba's intelligence at the face of the scale of what the universe holds.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
A Message to Creationists: Put up or Shut up!

I think this sums things up rather nicely.





new topics
 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join