evolution: The greatest conspiracy

Also, please. Let's keep this thread a bit more on topic.
You guys spend three pages debating whether there was evidence of a God and Christianity vs others.

Please, there are religion forums. If God comes up. Fine. But keep a discussion of God/no God to u2u (feel free to write me. I'll give you a good debate) and keep the more... unorthodox ideas, and the defense of them on other threads. Please. You can state what you believe but if someone laughs at you, u2u them saying why you believe it.
I'm sure it's fascinating but... not the topic we are on.

This is now a "long thread" in my thoughts. Let's try and do a little house cleaning Ok?

reply to post by sisgood

unorthodox

it isn't unorthodox. it's the history of our planet.
here we are pretending that none of our ancient history is true...calling it unorthodox... it's mind boggling.
i mean if you accept the old roman catholic interpretation, the planet was 6k years old, and all the ancient texts except for the bible, were lies.
that's why everything is so messed up! we need to revisit the old cultures, their texts and artifacts and artworks, and wallah, we'll be well on our way to figuring out why they can't find us in the fossil record.

Originally posted by sisgood
Also, please. Let's keep this thread a bit more on topic.
You guys spend three pages debating whether there was evidence of a God and Christianity vs others.

Don't you think that comment is somewhat hypocritical since you randomly brought up global warming a few pages ago?

reply to post by andrewh7


It was not random. I was stating that if global warming is happening. Keep watching the "delicate" species and see if they evolve and survive.
If "leaps of evolution through climate change" is in fact correct, we may be seeing significant climate change for an evolutionary "leap"

Originally posted by sisgood
I have a question for those who believe in evolution.

Why don't we have transitional species wandering around today?
Not just humans (and if you tell me about the lung fish, I'll scream... That's ONE!) but all other animals.

How can you ask for transitional species existing today? That doesn't make sense at all. How can you classify a species as transitional when you don't have access to a future incarnation of that animal by which to make a comparison? Do you have a time machine? I don't.

If you consider a lung fish to be "transitional" based on the fact that it lives in the water and yet possesses lungs, then all water-dwelling mammals could be classified as transitional, such as dolphins and whales.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by sisgood

 

unorthodox

it isn't unorthodox. it's the history of our planet.
here we are pretending that none of our ancient history is true...calling it unorthodox... it's mind boggling.
i mean if you accept the old roman catholic interpretation, the planet was 6k years old, and all the ancient texts except for the bible, were lies.
that's why everything is so messed up! we need to revisit the old cultures, their texts and artifacts and artworks, and wallah, we'll be well on our way to figuring out why they can't find us in the fossil record.

As I stated before, I do not believe the earth is that young. I agree with you about ancient cultures and know what you are speaking of with the sereph. I don't quite know what to think in regards to that and have been meaning to research the information you sent me and reply... when I have the time lol.

However, for people that haven't been presented with the evidence, and don't believe in a God, the idea is a bit out there. Presenting such information to people such as andrewh7 only degrades your credibility in his eyes. Give it to people like that one bite at a time.

reply to post by andrewh7


How can I ask for transitional species? Because, in my mind, if evolution was true and we did come from apes, monkeys, chimps, whatever.
There should be missing links wandering around today. I am not asking you to predict what things will be.
Give me a few examples of half-formed (but either useful or not harmful) evolutionary steps that led to a creature that is alive today. Both the example of the evolving trait need to be an alive species and the creature that has fully developed the trait must be alive.

It's late, I'm cold, (we aren't running the heat... it isn't THAT cold) and I'm going to bed. I'll check back in the morning.

Goodnight!

Originally posted by sisgood
reply to post by andrewh7

 

How can I ask for transitional species? Because, in my mind, if evolution was true and we did come from apes, monkeys, chimps, whatever.
There should be missing links wandering around today. I am not asking you to predict what things will be.
Give me a few examples of half-formed (but either useful or not harmful) evolutionary steps that led to a creature that is alive today. Both the example of the evolving trait need to be an alive species and the creature that has fully developed the trait must be alive.

I don't think you understand what the definition of species is. A species is defined as a group of individuals who are capable of successful reproduction with each other. As soon as two of its member's are no longer capable of reproducing due to differences in their genetic makeup, they are no longer the same species. Nevertheless, even at this point they will still share similarities in appearance and genetics.

Every single species on the earth now is a transitional species because evolution is an ongoing process. So, unless the animal's present form goes extinct, it will one day be considered a "transitional" species, under your definition. Example: Species B and Species C are descendants of Species A. If population B began as a portion of A that was separated by the formation of say a new river from the rest of A, then by the time that group of A became B, the rest of population A became C. Evolution is slow, gradual and effects all members of a species that actively breed with one another. Generally, you aren't going to find that common ancestor of two or more related species alive because it became all of its modern descendants.
It's similar to you asking me to produce the living common ancestor that you and I have because we are both human. If that request is stupid for two members of the same species, then how stupid do you think it is to demand a living precursor to two species who likely haven't shared a common ancestor in a much longer period of time than the two of us. It doesn't exist anywhere except the fossil record.

If you want some good examples, I suggest you actually read On the Origin of the Species. Darwin's finches (also known as the Galápagos Finches or as Geospizinae) are 13 or 14 separate combinatory species of Passerine birds (related to American Emberizidae or Tanagers rather than European finches) related to a group that Charles Darwin collected on the Galápagos Islands during the voyage of the Beagle. Thirteen reside on the Galápagos Islands and one on Cocos Island.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7b4bb09e3fe0.jpg[/atsimg]

Different Species of Finch - each having adapted to exploit different niches in the environment.

* Genus Geospiza
o Large Cactus-finch, Geospiza conirostris
o Sharp-beaked Ground-finch, Geospiza difficilis
+ Vampire Finch, Geospiza difficilis septentrionalis
o Medium Ground-finch, Geospiza fortis
o Small Ground-finch, Geospiza fuliginosa
o Large Ground-finch, Geospiza magnirostris
+ Darwin's Large Ground-finch, Geospiza magnirostris magnirostris - possibly extinct (1957?)
o Common Cactus-finch, Geospiza scandens
* Genus Camarhynchus
o Vegetarian Finch, Camarhynchus crassirostris - sometimes separated in Platyspiza
o Large Tree-finch, Camarhynchus psittacula
o Medium Tree-finch, Camarhynchus pauper
o Small Tree-finch, Camarhynchus parvulus
o Woodpecker Finch, Camarhynchus pallidus - sometimes separated in Cactospiza
o Mangrove Finch, Camarhynchus heliobates
* Genus Certhidea
o Warbler Finch, Certhidea olivacea
* Genus Pinaroloxias
o Cocos Island Finch, Pinaroloxias inornata


[edit on 5-10-2009 by andrewh7]

Originally posted by John Matrix
reply to post by xelamental

 

If you die having rejected the Son of God,

it is the end of everything for you.

God gives you a choice:

Live for Him, or live for the grave.

The Gift of God is eternal life!

You send yourself to Hell when you reject the Son of God.

Assuming man has picked the books correctly, and it wasn't just goat herders on psychedelics.

There is no choice. The bible promotes stupidity, hate and bigotry from a being who has killed more humans than hitler, but has conned you into believing he loves you? And he needs money! Have you ever wondered if you have it all ENTIRELY backwards - that blind faith in an imaginary friend with an ego the size of the universe is like failing the universe's intelligence test?

Why people insist on making a monkey out of themselves?
Lifestyle.
The Bible and God lay down guidelines and laws for mankind to live by.

At the same time they place certain restrictions on how to live. These are mostly against abominations that a normal human being wouldn't have anything to do with anyway. What some don't want to accept is that if followed, a happy and
full life becomes far more possible.

To put it plainly, evolution is the biggest fairytale of all. Dreamed up by
fairys for fairys and just about anyone else who has done or is doing something in their life that they them selves know is unacceptable.
Evolution ! How convenient? but that's all it amounts to.
Spot on Sis .For the love of monkeys I see no resemblence at all.
Hence their often very obvious desperation to convince others of their
lame views. Evolutionists and Atheists.






[edit on 5-10-2009 by randyvs]

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by idle_rocker

 

precisely. because it isn't a theory, it's a fact. it's a fact. you hear me, it's a fact! and if you don't know if it's a fact, you are trying to retard humanity and are not intellectual or rational.

/end of my horrible attempt at sarcasm!

i beg the apologies of all and sundry for stooping to bitter sarcasm, as it cheapens my intellectual offering with negative emotions and that ain't where i want to go with this. let me rephrase.......

it appears that they must approach the topic as if it were fact, so that the science may continue. the problem with that is, in the world of empirical process it springs a leak

Wow. Yeah, it doesn't work like that, at least not with reputable people.
It's not like we just go about making up stargates out of doors or anything, or taking a fable to be literally true!

I believe in God and in evolution. You make the baseball diamond, what makes you think you cant make the rules of the game? The rules of the game are: dont violate any of the laws of physics, chemistry or whatever. God made the universe and evolution is just of the things that arose in his universe. If I make an antfarm, I can certainly design it how I like and let evolution play out. It will be limited because i would have engineered it that way. I have made the antfarm a certain size, a certain amount of food. God has provided the earth of a certain size, with a certain amount of food and us humans with a brain to increase the capacity of the food supply. Unfortunately we still cant leave the bounds of the universe.....thats his rules so far.

Originally posted by randyvs
Why people insist on making a monkey out of themselves.

Lifestyle.
The Bible and God lay down guidelines and laws for mankind to live by.

At the same time they place certain restrictions on how to live. These are mostly against abominations that a normal human being wouldn't have anything to do with anyway. What some don't want to accept is that if followed, a happy and
full life becomes far more possible.

To put it plainly, evolution is the biggest fairytale of all. Dreamed up by
fairys for fairys and just about anyone else who has done or is doing something in their life that they them selves know is unacceptable.
Evolution ! How convenient? but that's all it amounts too.
Spot on Sis .For the love of monkeys I see no resemblence at all.

Take it from a first principles standpoint. Making no assumptions about the world, forgetting about the bible & other texts (true or not), go out into the world and try and figure out how things work.

You do realise we have a hundred + years of data (like literally thousands of hard disks full) that support evolution. Every field, chemistry, biochemistry, mol bio, genetics, physics, math, stats, anthropology and more have collected data independently, and the predictions evolution makes are spot on. As new data comes in, we get more and more certain about evolution, because all the data just fits!

Now, you may believe in a book and in a god, but that doesn't change the data and it doesn't change what it looks like. When I was younger and doing my masters in molecular biology I used to say "either god's not real or he's faking all this evidence; I choose the latter".

Unfortunately, by denying a theory that has so much experimental evidence for it, you really do prove yourself to be unable to think rationally about the subject.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
I believe in God and in evolution. You make the baseball diamond, what makes you think you cant make the rules of the game? The rules of the game are: dont violate any of the laws of physics, chemistry or whatever. God made the universe and evolution is just of the things that arose in his universe. If I make an antfarm, I can certainly design it how I like and let evolution play out. It will be limited because i would have engineered it that way. I have made the antfarm a certain size, a certain amount of food. God has provided the earth of a certain size, with a certain amount of food and us humans with a brain to increase the capacity of the food supply. Unfortunately we still cant leave the bounds of the universe.....thats his rules so far.

I used to think like this. Unfortunately you are actually in a state of cognitive dissonance as I once was. The problem is that the bible says it's literally true. If you can't take it as literally true it means that everything may just be metaphor - you can't believe anything it says. It's one or the other buddy: either he's real and everything is literal (and all science is wrong) or nothing in the book can be trusted. This is in scripture.

Usually it takes a few years of thinking for what I call a weak theist like yourself to convert to strong agnostic. Then it's a slipperly slope to athiest my friend, good luck

reply to post by xelamental



well hello there! you read my theory i take it? actually, i'm not the only one that believes such things are possible. my approach to the topic is just a bit farther back in the timeline. see the thing i like about the area of research i've been looking at is, it's based on real texts and real artifacts and real artworks, created by real people thousands of years ago. and although an argument can be made that some of the ancient texts are piece meal, it's more than obvious that the fossil record is piece meal. now that doesn't mean it isn't real, but it also doesn't mean we are in there anywhere.

reply to post by xelamental

You do realise we have a hundred + years of data (like literally thousands of hard disks full)

I've been realising things, obviously since you were in diapers.
above top secret ok all fixed up for you
Woohoo, one hundred years of data now that's impressive. Are you sure you even want to mention that? I would n't in the future. The whole dreamed up theory dosn't hold the weight of one page of the Bible.
Here forget about the lies TPTB have spun for you and soak up some real truth.




[edit on 5-10-2009 by randyvs]

reply to post by randyvs


your link doesn't go anywhere! lol
fix it fix it, i wanna read it.
it's the missing link!

[edit on 5-10-2009 by undo]

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
I got the scholar status for research on a topic, you should try it sometime

If you looked through my posts on this topic, and if you RESEARCHED my profile page, you would see you have absolutely no excuse for sniping me in the ill manner you did. You would also have discovered that I have no need for you to explain to me what evolution is, or isn't.

Evolution is not science, and science is not evolution. Evolution is someone's fantasy that became the delusion of the masses.

The DNA evidence is in, and evolution is out. The Math proves evolution is impossible.

reply to post by John Matrix

The DNA evidence is in, and evolution is out. The Math proves evolution is impossible.

check ouit my link partner.backing you up all the way.
Evolution maybe convenient, but it isn't even impressive even as a theory.
Anyone could dream this crap up. It's only logic LIES in the fact that
it is the first place the human mind will go, upon making a conscious determined decision not to believe in God. Nothing impressive at all.

[edit on 5-10-2009 by randyvs]