Is there any better argument against intelligent design that the human mouth/teeth?

reply to post by Monger


I said that I BELIEVE you are bowing down to religious beliefs. I did not say anything about the bible....although if you do not believe in EVOLUTION it is logical to assume that the belief in a Creationist based religion is driving you.

As far as Evolution vs. Creationism is concerned....that arguement is long over as Evolution has been definatively proven as a FACT.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


But WHAT definitively proved as FACT? I'm looking for concrete evidence here... Not just your word that it is fact.

reply to post by freedomlover79


I suggest you go read ATS's Terms and Services. What do you want me to tell you? I just gave you a little tip for future reference. If you took offense to that, then that's on you. You don't get to dictate where somebody is allowed to post. If you'll recall, you're the one who told another poster not to 'chime in,' when that poster has every right to do so.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Monger

 

I said that I BELIEVE you are bowing down to religious beliefs. I did not say anything about the bible....although if you do not believe in EVOLUTION it is logical to assume that the belief in a Creationist based religion is driving you.

As far as Evolution vs. Creationism is concerned....that arguement is long over as Evolution has been definatively proven as a FACT.

Split Infinity

I'm going to go ahead and assume that you didn't intend to post this as a reply to me.

Edit: Perhaps you'll note that the post of mine you replied to was directed at another poster, and not at yourself. As far as evolution is concerned, you and I are on the same page.

reply to post by SplitInfinity

I recognize your attempt to marginalize my belief in creation by YOUR statement that evolution is fact. But without proof, your argument of evolution as fact is in vain. Once again, I'm not trying to troll this thread, but your desperation to make me believe you is evidence of intolerance of the evolution side of the opinion. For what it's worth, you will not change my beliefs or make me "see the light" that humans evolved from some subatomic particles somewhere back in time.

reply to post by Monger


Ok, so we're getting into semantics. How could I enforce that other person's ability to "chime in"? Can I delete their post or repress their rights to post? Without my ability to do either it was just words.

reply to post by freedomlover79


I've seen mods take action on posters for a lot less under their 'Manners and Decorum' policy. You don't think it's rude, telling a fellow ATSer that they can't 'chime in' on a certain subject? I'm sure the mods might.

Again, the site's Terms and Services are not hard to find. The mods and admins generally hold us to a pretty high standard.

That will do, thank you

Stick to the actual topic. Reread the opening post if you're unsure what it is. DO NOT focus on each other. Focus on the arguments presented.

Thank you.

reply to post by Monger


Ok, if that's the case, then I apoligize to the poster. But I will re-assert that I cannot enforce any statement I made. And I will assert that anyone who posts on these forums should have a certain "thick skin" in anticipation of any reply they may receive. For example, see previous posts in this thread from certain evolutionists to certain creationists. Wait, I'm the only creationist on this thread?

Final warning. Any further off-topic posts will result in a time-out for that person - which is not up for debate.

Stick to the topic. Do not insult or respond to insults.

reply to post by freedomlover79


See the above post from GemWolf. We need to get back on topic.

Thanks to GemWolf for sorting out this debacle. There will be no further off topic posts from this guy, at least.

reply to post by Gemwolf


Rgr that.

For a clear example of evolution in action, one need look no further than various species first described by the father of evolutionary theory himself, Charles Darwin. Or at least some finches he gave his name too. Darwin's finches

The most striking and important fact for us in regard to the inhabitants of islands, is their affinity to those of the nearest mainland, without being actually the same species. [In] the Galapagos Archipelago... almost every product of the land and water bears the unmistakable stamp of the American continent. There are twenty-six land birds, and twenty-five of these are ranked by Mr. Gould as distinct species, supposed to have been created here; yet the close affinity of most of these birds to American species in every character, in their habits, gestures, and tones of voice, was manifest.

An exert from Darwin's own writing on the finches.

Darwin's findings at Galapagos, that a single species of finch could evolve over time into many distinctly different species of finches found nowhere else in the world but on these small volcanic islands is proof-positive of evolution in action.

Perhaps you should check out On the Origin of Species, you might surprise yourself.

reply to post by Monger


Sorry about that as I was distracted.

My Apologies.

Split Infinity

reply to post by Monger


I wouldn't surprise myself. Darwin saw the species in their then-present state. He could not have possibly known their previous state. And if he could have known their previous state, then we would be getting completely off-topic and wondering why Charles Darwin didn't completely solve our present-day crises, because he would have obviously been a time traveller. I will state again that no one here will change my mind about this topic and obviously I'm outnumbered here by users and moderators so I will say peace to this thread. Don't expect to hear from me again.

reply to post by Gemwolf


I would like to say sorry for getting so personal as this is something that I myself have stated is something to avoid to have a good debate.

This apology goes out to everyone including the person I was disagreeing with.

I would like to say that many people have many different beliefs as far as whether there is a GOD or not and it is obvious that this factors in greatly as far as Evolution vs. Creation.

The one thing I would ask of those who believe in Creation...and therefor do not believe in Evolution....A persons belief in GOD is NOT in conflict with the REALITY of EVOLUTION. I would prefer to keep RELIGION OUT of such debates but since this topic is also about Intelligent Design....which if taken by it's name sake myself and many people would have no issue of...but instead it has been warped into a Non-Scientific Illogical religion of nonsence that does not have a leg to stand on as well as being banned in all 50 states from being taught in Public Schools.

If Intelligent Design meant....the Creation of our Universe by a GOD using the dual processes of Quantum Evolution as well as Biological Evolution....then it could not be either proven or disproven thus it could stand within Logic.

But as far as the reality of either Quantum Evolution....the Quantum driven process of Matter continualy developing by various Universal mechanisms into greater and greater Molecular complexity and thus achieving GENESIS....and Biological Evolution....which is that Life developing into greater complexity and diversity through Natural Selection, Mutation and Survival of the Fittest....these things are KNOWNS and have been PROVEN.

Split Infinity