Evolution - Yes it DID bloody well happen!

teg shrugs you didn't even read all of my entry or you ignored some of it. I stated clearly in it that people killed in God's name and that was wrong. But Nasa the organization that has more experience in space than you supports the big bang theory. yes like all theorys some don't beleive but whats the point??? That doesn't prove anything either way.. and none of the people that dispute the big bang has a resume as long as Nasa in space that do support it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's all in the interpretation....

Very good "Justagirl" this is the first time I've encountered this one, however there's a small flaw of your view of it, according to rumors back when they were discovering ways to date substance like rocks or dino bones, the church was all over the scientists claiming that the earth was only 6000 thousand years old. Heck I don't know were the notion came from, but it seems these bible scholars believe the earht is a lot younger, than billions of years old, this some how does not agree with Moses.

Because the earth would have been only 4000 years old.

Explain this one: If Genesis is true, were do all the rest of people come from? blacks, whites, chinnese, koreans, etc... Are we all descendents of just Adam and Eve?

Adam & Eve have two kids, one kills his brother, cane gets thrown out of Eden, than he marries? who? where did she come from?

Like the whole bible Genesis is just fable, good tie in though. Good imagination on your part.. However the church does not support the "big bang" theorie.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I saw it with my own eyes when I watched bacteria mutate under a microscope.

Bacteria are wonderful proofs of evolution, as they evolve faster, much faster, than do most other life forms on Earth.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Tiassa:

Damn. You still religious?

"Junk DNA? It serves a specific purpose; nature isn't extraneous."

I have to point out that, unless you are religious, nature doesn't serve any purpose. Nature follows laws that give reason to things that happen. Even though the "Junk" DNA might not serve a purpose, there is reason for the DNA to be there. Viri that have injected their DNA may kill a being, yet if that DNA is taken out, no worries. It may be that it just so happened that beings evolved a way to remove "junk" DNA that would otherwise be harmful. It just so happens that the "junk" is much easier after it has been copied onto single strand RNA, as opposed to the double helixed DNA.

Also, many scientists believe that Junk DNA is a good defense against mutation. The more junk DNA there is, the better the probability is that IT will get mutated and not the useful DNA.

"Kerkut's notion is incorrect. There is no reason for life to have arisen from a single source. "

Sure there is. Kerkut's definition is correct. You cannot evolve from more than one source. WELL, you can, I suppose, but what are the chances that two creature from different evolutionary lines will be able to have sexual reproduction? I think the odds would rate in the inverse powers of hundreds.

OUR life system did not neccessarily "evolve" (meaning change into, ie. not the biology definition), from only one source, but most likely, only one source exists now. It is highly unlikely that two "sources" of life would have arrose at about the same time, and so once one got on its way, the second or even third "source" or its offspring would be quickly eaten. Most certainly today, any newly arrisen life "source" would be quickly disposed of by the ravenous beings that inhabit this planet.

 

Justagirl:

Those are some pretty good parrallels, although I think most people would agree that separating light from dark mean day from night and not star from space.

"yes like all theorys some don't beleive but whats the point??? "

You mention the point of theories. Well, some theories are for asthetic value, theories that most likely will never help us. Math has many such theories. A mathemetition can spend his life discovering asthetic theories that will never be of any use or interest to anyone else. These are theories that either cannot be proven or can not serve to give predictions.

The POINT of a theory is to give predictions -- so we may continue to learn and invent better technology. What genisis predicts, most scientists have found contradictory to other information sources, such as the universe itself. And what predictions would genisis give us if we were to accept it other than "we need to obey god"?

Godless:

"However the church does not support the "big bang" theorie."

Actually I think it does or .rr. the pope has or something. The church accepts a lot of things that the bible does not, like evolution... I could be wrong though, I know they support evolution.

 

Evolution is wrong. Sorry Adam.

Dang I just now deicded to believe in God and here comes the ol' evolution debate. Well, show me proof of evolution. Show me proof that king henri excisted. Just kidding.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Most, if not all, of you should get that joke.

So if Im to get this correct you think that Adam and Eve were white? What ever gave you that idea?! Anyways, "God hath made of one blood all nations of men" (Acts 17:26). All of mankind springs from our first parents, Adam and Eve, and then through Noah's family. The Biblical distinction is between national groups, and especially languages, not skin color or other physical characteristics.

Its easily explained by the fact that they had sex with angels. Yep, angels. When that started to happen God took away their sex organs. But not before people were already being knocked up left and right. Thats why there are blind people, retarded people, paralyzed people, etc. It wasnt suppose to be like this.

I support the big bang theory in a way. What if God created the big bang? I couldnt think of a better way to make a universe, could you?

 

Poor Counselor... You've left Agnosticism for Insanity... *sigh*

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The point is not what race Adam and Eve were, but rather, how could we have all the different races and skin colours that we do today if we all came from just two parents with no evolution?

 

Counslor Coffee,

From Genisis 1v1 to Genisis 2v3 is a general description of the creation of the world, in Gen. 2v4 it begins di; These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,. It then gives an account of Adam the first person who was created as a viceroy on Earth; Holy Qur’an. 2nd sura, verse 30; And when your Lord said to the angels: “Behold! I will create a viceroy on earth.”
But in the first chapter of Genisis, a summary, God had created mankind; Gen. 1v26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Of the mankind, Adam was the first, he role was that of a viceroy;

viceroy n 1: governor of a country or province who rules as the representative of his or her king or sovereign.

If he was a viceroy, then he must have had some people to govern, does that make sense. If he had people to govern, then it is easy to understand how Cane could marry a woman.

In this way, he was a representative of God. In the Qur’an, God had already taught His viceroy the name of all things; 2nd sura v. 31. And He taught Adam the names of all things; then He showed them to the angels, and said:

In such ancient sciptures, a summerized account is nearly always given first.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

I dont know about you guys, but evolution and the big bang theory is a good speculation...There is fossil evidence of dinosaurs, and carbon dating also proves that earth is about 15 billion years old.
Indeed evolution, the fact that things evolve, is a good speculation.

Although there is no proof of evolution and Napoleon and Magellan(as according to you there is no proof of Intelligent cause). I do put faith in them because they have evidence to support the claim. Unlike the claim of toothfairies, giant purple squid monkey, atheism, nature as chance, YOU HAVE TO BE MENTALLY CHALLENGE TO PUT YOUR FAITH IN SOMETHING THAT HAVE NO EVIDENCE (atheism), either that or you are just proving the existence of the Devil...

 

Fifteen billion years, eh?

 

makes me wonder - they talk about evolution, carbon dating and science when they know nothing of what they are talking about

 

whatsup,

No that is incorrect. You state they are theories and then say they are speculation, choose one. I suggest first you try to understand what is meant by a scientific theory. Try this link –

http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node5.html

Again you appear confused, either choose fact or speculation, they cannot be both.

I’m not sure at this point whether you think Evolution is just speculation or not. But the article below explains the key evidences for evolution that scientists often refer to as the facts of evolution. It is a long and detailed article, but well worth keeping as good reference material.

29 Evidences for Macroevolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Introduction.

Evolution, the overarching concept which unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses. In evolutionary debates one is apt to hear evolution roughly parceled between the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution." Microevolution, or change beneath the species level, may be thought of as relatively small scale change in the functional and genetic constituencies of populations of organisms. That this occurs and has been observed is generally undisputed by critics of evolution. What is vigorously challenged, however, is macroevolution. Macroevolution, as used here, is the theory of universal common descent with gradual modification.

Common descent is a general descriptive theory that proposes to explain the origins of living organisms (though not the ultimate origin of life). Because it is so well supported scientifically, macroevolution is often called the "fact of evolution" by biologists. The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth's known biota are genealogically related, much in the same way that siblings or cousins are related to one another. Thus, macroevolutionary processes necessarily entail the transformation of one species into another and, consequently, the origin of higher taxa. For these reasons, proponents of special creation are especially hostile to macroevolutionary aspects of the biological sciences.

This article directly addresses the scientific evidences in favor of macroevolutionary theory and common descent. It is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or no testable predictions, cannot be falsified, or has not been scientifically demonstrated.

 

Poor Counselor... You've left Agnosticism for Insanity... *sigh*

GB Im not insane! *Rubs insanity mark off of his head* Why wont this stupid thing come off.

The point is not what race Adam and Eve were, but rather, how could we have all the different races and skin colours that we do today if we all came from just two parents with no evolution?

Okay we've got overwhelming support for the theory of evolution, yippee. At one point in time we had overwhelming support that the Earth was the center of the sun.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Lets think of it in this way. If you were God how long do you think it would take you to make a planet? A solar system? The universe? Would time even matter? Maybe to God a day is like 2 Billion years. Would God ever even notice that it had been 2 Billion of our years? Would he even care? Is God on the same clock that we are?

God: Oh crap! Its daylight savings time! I forgot to set back my clock.

OR

God: Oh man! I must have dosed off. Lets see what happened on Earth while I was asleep. Hmmm seems to me that that guy Hitler died, the USA went into a cold war for fifty years! What the hell? Why didn't someone tell me that they landed on the moon to?

 

CC

At one point in time we had overwhelming support that the Earth was the center of the sun

I don't think that's entirely accurate. Read your statement again.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

LOL, Cris, always looses a debate, you need to think twice before opening your mouth.....Have u noticed something, I always beat u on a debate....
Are you telling me evolution is a fact? Even though there is NO EVIDENCE that one species changed to another? (for this will require MILLLIONS OF YEARS acccording to evolutionist. HOW CAN A GOOD SPECULATION BE A FACT WHEN IT HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED? I thought u said monkey see monkey do? TYou only believe when you see it right? Why then do you believe in evolution as a fact? IF EVOLUTION IS A FACT, THEN GOD IS A FACT, FOR BOTH HAVE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE, BUT BOTH ALSO LACK EVIDENCE OF DEMONSTRATION....

AGAIN I HAVE FAITH IN GOD, EVOLUTION, BIG BANG, AND SCIENTIFIC SPECULATION AND THEORY WITH EVIDENCE, IF IT HAS NO EVIDENCE LIKE ATHEISM, THEN I REJECT IT BECAUSE IM NOT A RETARD....
Now how does evolution contradict Adam and Eve when the church and bible scholars teaches them to be only about 6,000 years old, AND WHEN EVOLUTION'S SPECULATION IS TELLING US THAT WE WERE CAVEMAN 25,000 YRS AGO AND HOMO-ERECTUS AND APE LOOKING MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO...
Adam and Eve and the bible doesnt contradict with scientific facts, unless you take the bible literally....


(Cris, you losed the debate again...LOL)

 

Jan Ardena:

"If he was a viceroy, then he must have had some people to govern, does that make sense. If he had people to govern, then it is easy to understand how Cane could marry a woman."

I suppose If he was viceroy, he would need people, MAYBE. But then the question comes along: "Where did those people he is viceroy over COME from?"

Also, you might realize there is the possibility of an inaccurate translation. They might have meant he rule the lands, not implying that there were also people.

Whatsupall:

You keep saying Atheism is some sort of theory. It, simply, is not.

"YOU HAVE TO BE MENTALLY CHALLENGE TO PUT YOUR FAITH IN SOMETHING THAT HAVE NO EVIDENCE (atheism), "

So what you are saying is "YOU have NO evidence that there IS NO evidence of god!!!"??

?? Might I reitterate?? ??

If there is no evidence of god, then we have no evidence that there is no evidence. If there is evidence (such as you believe) then we do have evidence, yet contrary evidence. Do you understand that something that does not exist cannot have evidence?

By the way, I thought you were against evolution... What happened?

"LOL, Cris, always looses a debate"

You are the only one that thinks that, might you stick to the facts?

"Are you telling me evolution is a fact? "

This is a HUGE misunderstanding. Cris is simply nitpicking on definitions. Speculation is something that has 0 evidence, no evdence, zippo for or against it. Theory is something that has quite a lot of evidence, but may later have to be modefied or scratched due to new observations.

I understand that your shpeal was just trying to say that evolution is not 100% proven. And my retort is that nothing is. Comparing evidence of god and evidence of evolution is entirely different....

"SCIENTIFIC SPECULATION AND THEORY WITH EVIDENCE, "

Not to be nitpicking like cris, but speculation is something WITHOUT evidence.

By the way, earth is thought to be 4.5 billion years old, ruling out the possibility for evolution for 15 billion years....

 

Coffee:

"At one point in time we had overwhelming support that the Earth was the center of the sun."

I belive that speculation was that the earth is the center of the solar system, not the hot ball of gas

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Q could have easily pointed this out to you....

 

Another example of demon possesion (as what I call peopl who cant think normally). Frenchy, I never said I was against evolution...NEVER, even from the beggining...the church agrees with evolution, and so do I, only the southern baptist and other christians who take the bible literally are those who disagrees with evolution....

LOL, the big bang took place about some 15 billion years ago (as the theory, WHICH BY THE WAY YOU DONT LIKE TO CALL "SPECULATION" WHEN THE FACT IS IT IS). Earth CANNOT be 5 billion years oold in that case....

Frenchy, tell me the difference. Evidence of evolution is based on macro evolution that it evolves everywhere, but you have not demonstrated evidence that a species change to another for this will require millions of years.
Evidence of God is based on intelligent cause (and much much more) which is proven everywhere, but we have not demonstrated evidence the creation of earth because earth existed before you and me did.
So tell me Frenchy, what is the evidence volution have that an intelligent designer dont, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT....
IN FACT THERE IS MUCH MORE EVIDENCE FOR GOD THAN FOR EVOLUTION.
IF GOD IS A SPECULATION, THEN EVOLUTION IS A SPECULATION, IF EVOLUTION IS A FACT, THEN GOD IS A FACT. IF EVOLUTION IS PROVEN, THEN GOD IS PROVEN...SIMPLE...LOGIC..

 

"the church agrees with evolution, and so do I,"

Oh ya, now I remember you saying that.

"LOL, the big bang took place about some 15 billion years ago. Earth CANNOT be 5 billion years oold in that case.... "

... Why not? Um.. 15 billion years is LARGER than 5 billion, sooo whats the problem?

"So tell me Frenchy, what is the evidence volution have that an intelligent designer dont, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IT...."

Well, fossil evidence for one thing. And we have witnessed bacteria evolve into more resistant bacteria, I don't suppose you would count that as another species?

 

You have fossil of instinct dinosaurs, thats a good physical evidence. Some scientist have confirmed this to be a real bones, some havent, as I have not studied the fossils myself and confirm in my own eyes they are really that old, therefore in order for me to believe it, I must have faith.
We have bleeding statues, healing of incurable cancers through prayers, etc. this is also a good physical evidence. Some scientist have confirmed this to be genuine, some havent, as you have never seen miracles took place in your own eyes, therefore in order for you to believe it you must have faith as well.

A bacteria changed into a stronger bacteria, YOU DONT NEED TO BE AN EXPERT TO FIGURE THAT OUT, I used to be weak and skinny, but from all the working out, I evolved into a much stronger man, but I didnt evolve into a different species and became a lion THATS A FACT...For you to disagree with that, you need to present reason and evidence, such as prove it to me that humans dont evolve (fact is we do, from conception to adulthood); theres none to support against it, thats why I accept evolution and have faith in it....
Everything that lives with intelligence, are the cause of intelligent act. Reproduction are caused by two partners, both posses intelligence. Even cells have intelligence. THATS A FACT. For you to disagree with that, you need to present reason and evidence, such as prove it to me that existence of intelligence is caused by "luck" (fact is intelligence is proven, and "luck (chance)" isn't, and is proven a lie by science); theres none to support against it, thats one of many reasons why I accept God and have faith in Him....


CASE CLOSED, GOD EXISTS, THOSE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE, OTHERWISE SHUT YOUR HOLE AND GO BACK TO BEING AGNOSTIC, AND EDUCATE YOURSELF MORE....OK KIDS....