Well I have stopped replying because of quality of the retorts to the scientific disputes put forth.
They are basically summed up as, evolution is true, evolution is true, you're a creationist, you're a creationist and even if you swear you are not you are secretly a creationist because only a religious fanatic would criticize evolution.
I have posted studies, criticism of studies, explained what I would do in the actual classroom situation, lists of scientists, picked apart articles showing assumptions and biases.
I have not mentioned a competing theory, claimed God, the Bible or anything else and yet some in this thread sit there and make unsubstanciated claims, post paranoid delusions, and do it 25 times a day before I can come home and actually respond.
Oh well, at least we learned who is open minded and who truly will bash based off of blind faith. To bad they get to do it while claiming it is scientific.
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
So thanks for proving my point. Since so many here have proven that even those who would consider themselves rational and scientific have shown that they believe evolution is not just a theory, but closely associated with a worldview.
If it weren't a worldview, then you could criticize it just like any other science, but since criticism = must love religion it is obvious that it means much more to them. Since they cannot differenciate between theory and worldview, criticism should be mandatory.
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
Evolution is an excellent theory that conforms to just about everything we know about anatomy, the fossil record, chemistry and physics. It's a GREAT theory. That's a fact.
No-one would act in this manner over other scientific theories because no other scientific theory gets bashed like evolution and deserves to be defended like evolution.
The only people who ever have any cause to bash evolution are religious fundamentalists. Everybody else thinks it an excellent theory, which it is.
It is a superb theory with an enormous body of detailed research behind it that gets more complete every month.
Evolution is an excellent theory that conforms to just about everything we know about anatomy, the fossil record, chemistry and physics. It's a GREAT theory. That's a fact.
No-one would act in this manner over other scientific theories because no other scientific theory gets bashed like evolution and deserves to be defended like evolution.
The only people who ever have any cause to bash evolution are religious fundamentalists. Everybody else thinks it an excellent theory, which it is.
It is a superb theory with an enormous body of detailed research behind it that gets more complete every month.
It doesn't conform to the fossil record. It doesn't withstand scrutiny by chemistry. It is an UNTESTED, UNOBSERVABLE theory that was created before the modern understanding of DNA and proteins. Many of the stories and supposed experiments supporting are not recent, not peer reviewed and upon further examination are shown to reflect our own ignorance. (Peppered moths are nocturnal, let's release them during the day for example)
When someone uses Piltdown man or something of that nature as a proof against evolution, it does not win arguments scientifically saying that evolution doesn't work. But it does show the humanistic bias within the science since such an obvious error took 50 years to be rejected.
Perhaps in another 50 years or so you will be less fanatical and more willing to indulge actual science in your claims rather than just ideological nonsense.
Last I checked chemistry is a field that chemist study. Chemistry does not scrutinize. Chemist scrutinize. Under some chemists' scrutiny evolution doesn't make sense. Under many more chemists' (including my own) scrutiny, evolution makes sense. No one apparently read my posts (well maybe someone did).
I Many of the stories and supposed experiments supporting are not recent, not peer reviewed and upon further examination are shown to reflect our own ignorance. (Peppered moths are nocturnal, let's release them during the day for example)
While everything in your post is wrong, this is the most irritatingly wrong.
Well I have stopped replying because of quality of the retorts to the scientific disputes put forth.
They are basically summed up as, evolution is true, evolution is true, you're a creationist, you're a creationist and even if you swear you are not you are secretly a creationist because only a religious fanatic would criticize evolution.
I have posted studies, criticism of studies, explained what I would do in the actual classroom situation, lists of scientists, picked apart articles showing assumptions and biases.
I have not mentioned a competing theory, claimed God, the Bible or anything else and yet some in this thread sit there and make unsubstanciated claims, post paranoid delusions, and do it 25 times a day before I can come home and actually respond.
Oh well, at least we learned who is open minded and who truly will bash based off of blind faith. To bad they get to do it while claiming it is scientific.
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
So thanks for proving my point. Since so many here have proven that even those who would consider themselves rational and scientific have shown that they believe evolution is not just a theory, but closely associated with a worldview.
If it weren't a worldview, then you could criticize it just like any other science, but since criticism = must love religion it is obvious that it means much more to them. Since they cannot differenciate between theory and worldview, criticism should be mandatory.
Nick
Indeed.
It is rather interesting how sheepish so many are and will consume a theory with no questions asked. It is science they say. It is a scientific theory they will say. What they will not do is question evolution. This is the part that really amazes me. Well all the books and studies say evolution is true they will say. All the professors say it is true. It goes on and on. These people that fall for evolution do so not on any merits that actually support the theory of evolution but by social pressures that say "If you are one to question evolution you are a nut" "and if you accept the theory you are very intelligent like us scientists and professors" so for weak minded low self-esteem folks they want to appear in the "cool" group. This is exactly the cult of evolution. It is a group of humanists that want to say God is dead and materialism is how nothing turned into everything. These materialists do not recognize even the possibility of anything supernatural. No everything is a closed system that just evolves on its own. Until more students start to actually question things evolution will continue to be a theory that will deceive thousands more.
trumptman, I'm curious. Why do scientists in the earth and life sciences accept evolution? Why do people like my botanist brother-in-law use it every day in their work? Why aren't the actual experts in the relevant fields seeing these glaringly obvious flaws that people like you and Fellowship, who I'll generously call amateur biologists, see?
Are they all atheists, dupes, stupid, blind, brainwashed, what? It just doesn't make sense. Every scientist lives for the the opportunity to overthrow an old theory and replace it with their own. To be an Einstein or a Copernicus. Why aren't they doing it? You realize you are advocating a conspiracy theory here, right?
And why do people believe that there is a religious agenda to this? Because in our experience that's where the anti-evolution always comes from. I'd say it's a pretty damn good guess to infer that an anti-evolution perspective comes from a Christian conservative agenda, because that's where it has always comes from in the past.
Are you a Christian conservative? You seem to be denying that that's your perspective.
Hassan you have not read a thing over this subject have you. I read over every link you provided and they add nothing to support Evolution. They all speculate based on guess.
Show me one and only one thing that is actual evidence for evolution.
Quote:
The use of mitochondrial mtDNA to investigate human history is not without drawbacks.
The rate of mtDNA mutation is not well known. A study by Parsons et al. (1997) found a rate 20 times higher than that calculated from other sources. In an article reviewing mtDNA research, Strauss (1999a) reports that mtDNA mutation rates differ in some groups of animals, and can even vary dramatically in single lineages. Although there are many agreements, some divergence dates for modern animals calculated from mtDNA do not match with what is known from the fossil record.
I am sorry link after link of speculation based on assumptions is not going to cut it Hassan. You are welcome to believe it as you well know but if you are going to make a point come on and make it.
It is a group of humanists that want to say God is dead
This is a large and sweeping generalisation and is totally wrong. Supporting the theory of evolution does not imply one is an atheist or has no belief in the supernatural.
This is a large and sweeping generalisation and is totally wrong. Supporting the theory of evolution does not imply one is an atheist or has no belief in the supernatural.
You are correct that statement is not 100% always the case. There are exceptions to every rule but that is the rule regardless.
can anyone tell me why evolution can't just be God's hand in our world?
what requires Genesis to be taken literally? there are numerous passages (esp. when related directly to God) where figurative speech is used.
wtf is everyone arguing about?
Evolution backers - you get to keep evolution. you can believe it's from lightning and RNA in the oceans.
Creationists - you get to keep God as the origin of Man and every other creature on Earth. it just means that God might not do everything as a minute rice miracle. SO WHAT. as far as you're concerned, God is still the guiding/creating hand behind everyone/everything on earth.
You are correct that statement is not 100% always the case. There are exceptions to every rule but that is the rule regardless.
Fellowship
Now that Fellowship has granted the ability of posters to make broad generalizations or rules as they are called in the aforequoted post, those of you who have said that all people who question evolution are religious zealots can now raise that flag again, slap a sticker on them, and throw a hootenany....
can anyone tell me why evolution can't just be God's hand in our world?
what requires Genesis to be taken literally? there are numerous passages (esp. when related directly to God) where figurative speech is used.
wtf is everyone arguing about?
Evolution backers - you get to keep evolution. you can believe it's from lightning and RNA in the oceans.
Creationists - you get to keep God as the origin of Man and every other creature on Earth. it just means that God might not do everything as a minute rice miracle. SO WHAT. as far as you're concerned, God is still the guiding/creating hand behind everyone/everything on earth.
WHERE'S THE PROBLEM.
Glad you asked. Did you know I had a professor in college who made fun of Christians twice a week at minimum? He did not believe evolution was reconcilable with creationism. He all but hit us over the head with how evolution is a closed system with NOTHING supernatural about it.
THIS is where the problem lies. If one such as I am a Christian and view life as a supernatural creation by a supernatural God I can not expect a theory with no supporting evidence that materialism in a closed system is how nothing became everything including life.
Glad you asked. Did you know I had a professor in college who made fun of Christians twice a week at minimum? He did not believe evolution was reconcilable with creationism. He all but hit us over the head with how evolution is a closed system with NOTHING supernatural about it.
THIS is where the problem lies. If one such as I am a Christian and view life as a supernatural creation by a supernatural God I can not expect a theory with no supporting evidence that materialism in a closed system is how nothing became everything including life.
It is not a meshable two ideas.
Fellowship
is earth really a closed system? is anything, perhaps the universe but esoterics aside? i fail to understand your professor's claims...
say i believe in evolution. i also believe Genesis. i believe that evolution is the hand of God creating the world, and all that's in it.
why can't God work through evolution? which part doesn't mesh?
who cares if people say evolution is a closed system. you think you can measure the will of God? didn't think so. the fact that specific creatures lived, died, evolved, can all be God's plan. God creates the Universe and all that's in it, so why can't he have had some lightning hit an RNA strand or 12 to set off evolution as we know it?
if you truly believe in an all powerful God, why do you think evolution is out of his grasp?
I posted one web-page that demonstrates how you can prove the relation of homo neanderthalis to homo sapiens by extracting mitochondrial DNA from a fossil and another that demonstrates how fruit flies pass on an adaptation to insecticides and how we SEE the adaptation in their genes and Fellowship posts this:
Quote:
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Hassan you have not read a thing over this subject have you. I read over every link you provided and they add nothing to support Evolution. They all speculate based on guess.
Show me one and only one thing that is actual evidence for evolution.
say i believe in evolution. i also believe Genesis. i believe that evolution is the hand of God creating the world, and all that's in it.
why can't God work through evolution? which part doesn't mesh?
who cares if people say evolution is a closed system. you think you can measure the will of God? didn't think so. the fact that specific creatures lived, died, evolved, can all be God's plan. God creates the Universe and all that's in it, so why can't he have had some lightning hit an RNA strand or 12 to set off evolution as we know it?
if you truly believe in an all powerful God, why do you think evolution is out of his grasp?
aclimedes you are free to believe anything you wish. That is all I am doing as well. I clearly answered your question. We all need to live and let live with our differences. I am not going to give you a hard time because you have a different view I did simply explain why I did not see it the same.
I have followed Fellowship's link, and this is the website of the author.
It is, frankly, a joke.
In the meantime, I've posted two links above. One of them shows how neanderthals are related to hom sap and we can tell because we have extracted mitochondrial DNA from neanderthal fossils and how we can see inherited resistance to insecticides in the genes of fruit flies.
Comments
They are basically summed up as, evolution is true, evolution is true, you're a creationist, you're a creationist and even if you swear you are not you are secretly a creationist because only a religious fanatic would criticize evolution.
I have posted studies, criticism of studies, explained what I would do in the actual classroom situation, lists of scientists, picked apart articles showing assumptions and biases.
I have not mentioned a competing theory, claimed God, the Bible or anything else and yet some in this thread sit there and make unsubstanciated claims, post paranoid delusions, and do it 25 times a day before I can come home and actually respond.
Oh well, at least we learned who is open minded and who truly will bash based off of blind faith. To bad they get to do it while claiming it is scientific.
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
So thanks for proving my point. Since so many here have proven that even those who would consider themselves rational and scientific have shown that they believe evolution is not just a theory, but closely associated with a worldview.
If it weren't a worldview, then you could criticize it just like any other science, but since criticism = must love religion it is obvious that it means much more to them. Since they cannot differenciate between theory and worldview, criticism should be mandatory.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
Evolution is an excellent theory that conforms to just about everything we know about anatomy, the fossil record, chemistry and physics. It's a GREAT theory. That's a fact.
No-one would act in this manner over other scientific theories because no other scientific theory gets bashed like evolution and deserves to be defended like evolution.
The only people who ever have any cause to bash evolution are religious fundamentalists. Everybody else thinks it an excellent theory, which it is.
It is a superb theory with an enormous body of detailed research behind it that gets more complete every month.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Evolution is an excellent theory that conforms to just about everything we know about anatomy, the fossil record, chemistry and physics. It's a GREAT theory. That's a fact.
No-one would act in this manner over other scientific theories because no other scientific theory gets bashed like evolution and deserves to be defended like evolution.
The only people who ever have any cause to bash evolution are religious fundamentalists. Everybody else thinks it an excellent theory, which it is.
It is a superb theory with an enormous body of detailed research behind it that gets more complete every month.
It doesn't conform to the fossil record. It doesn't withstand scrutiny by chemistry. It is an UNTESTED, UNOBSERVABLE theory that was created before the modern understanding of DNA and proteins. Many of the stories and supposed experiments supporting are not recent, not peer reviewed and upon further examination are shown to reflect our own ignorance. (Peppered moths are nocturnal, let's release them during the day for example)
When someone uses Piltdown man or something of that nature as a proof against evolution, it does not win arguments scientifically saying that evolution doesn't work. But it does show the humanistic bias within the science since such an obvious error took 50 years to be rejected.
Perhaps in another 50 years or so you will be less fanatical and more willing to indulge actual science in your claims rather than just ideological nonsense.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
It doesn't withstand scrutiny by chemistry.
Last I checked chemistry is a field that chemist study. Chemistry does not scrutinize. Chemist scrutinize. Under some chemists' scrutiny evolution doesn't make sense. Under many more chemists' (including my own) scrutiny, evolution makes sense. No one apparently read my posts (well maybe someone did).
I give up.
Originally posted by trumptman
I Many of the stories and supposed experiments supporting are not recent, not peer reviewed and upon further examination are shown to reflect our own ignorance. (Peppered moths are nocturnal, let's release them during the day for example)
While everything in your post is wrong, this is the most irritatingly wrong.
Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza. Peer-reviewed as it gets.
Mitochondrial DNA from fossils.
Fossils and the chimp-human clade (hominadae)
Local inherited adaptions to insecticides detailed by genetic markers
Originally posted by trumptman
Well I have stopped replying because of quality of the retorts to the scientific disputes put forth.
They are basically summed up as, evolution is true, evolution is true, you're a creationist, you're a creationist and even if you swear you are not you are secretly a creationist because only a religious fanatic would criticize evolution.
I have posted studies, criticism of studies, explained what I would do in the actual classroom situation, lists of scientists, picked apart articles showing assumptions and biases.
I have not mentioned a competing theory, claimed God, the Bible or anything else and yet some in this thread sit there and make unsubstanciated claims, post paranoid delusions, and do it 25 times a day before I can come home and actually respond.
Oh well, at least we learned who is open minded and who truly will bash based off of blind faith. To bad they get to do it while claiming it is scientific.
When people see here how dogmatically people will defend evolution, moving wel beyond reason and logic, they wonder why I would suggest the criticisms be mandatory. No one would act in this manner over other scientific theories.
So thanks for proving my point. Since so many here have proven that even those who would consider themselves rational and scientific have shown that they believe evolution is not just a theory, but closely associated with a worldview.
If it weren't a worldview, then you could criticize it just like any other science, but since criticism = must love religion it is obvious that it means much more to them. Since they cannot differenciate between theory and worldview, criticism should be mandatory.
Nick
Indeed.
It is rather interesting how sheepish so many are and will consume a theory with no questions asked. It is science they say. It is a scientific theory they will say. What they will not do is question evolution. This is the part that really amazes me. Well all the books and studies say evolution is true they will say. All the professors say it is true. It goes on and on. These people that fall for evolution do so not on any merits that actually support the theory of evolution but by social pressures that say "If you are one to question evolution you are a nut" "and if you accept the theory you are very intelligent like us scientists and professors" so for weak minded low self-esteem folks they want to appear in the "cool" group. This is exactly the cult of evolution. It is a group of humanists that want to say God is dead and materialism is how nothing turned into everything. These materialists do not recognize even the possibility of anything supernatural. No everything is a closed system that just evolves on its own. Until more students start to actually question things evolution will continue to be a theory that will deceive thousands more.
Fellowship
Are they all atheists, dupes, stupid, blind, brainwashed, what? It just doesn't make sense. Every scientist lives for the the opportunity to overthrow an old theory and replace it with their own. To be an Einstein or a Copernicus. Why aren't they doing it? You realize you are advocating a conspiracy theory here, right?
And why do people believe that there is a religious agenda to this? Because in our experience that's where the anti-evolution always comes from. I'd say it's a pretty damn good guess to infer that an anti-evolution perspective comes from a Christian conservative agenda, because that's where it has always comes from in the past.
Are you a Christian conservative? You seem to be denying that that's your perspective.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
While everything in your post is wrong, this is the most irritatingly wrong.
Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza. Peer-reviewed as it gets.
Mitochondrial DNA from fossils.
Fossils and the chimp-human clade (hominadae)
Local inherited adaptions to insecticides detailed by genetic markers
Hassan you have not read a thing over this subject have you. I read over every link you provided and they add nothing to support Evolution. They all speculate based on guess.
Show me one and only one thing that is actual evidence for evolution.
The use of mitochondrial mtDNA to investigate human history is not without drawbacks.
The rate of mtDNA mutation is not well known. A study by Parsons et al. (1997) found a rate 20 times higher than that calculated from other sources. In an article reviewing mtDNA research, Strauss (1999a) reports that mtDNA mutation rates differ in some groups of animals, and can even vary dramatically in single lineages. Although there are many agreements, some divergence dates for modern animals calculated from mtDNA do not match with what is known from the fossil record.
I am sorry link after link of speculation based on assumptions is not going to cut it Hassan. You are welcome to believe it as you well know but if you are going to make a point come on and make it.
Fellowship
It is a group of humanists that want to say God is dead
This is a large and sweeping generalisation and is totally wrong. Supporting the theory of evolution does not imply one is an atheist or has no belief in the supernatural.
Originally posted by Stoo
This is a large and sweeping generalisation and is totally wrong. Supporting the theory of evolution does not imply one is an atheist or has no belief in the supernatural.
You are correct that statement is not 100% always the case. There are exceptions to every rule but that is the rule regardless.
Fellowship
what requires Genesis to be taken literally? there are numerous passages (esp. when related directly to God) where figurative speech is used.
wtf is everyone arguing about?
Evolution backers - you get to keep evolution. you can believe it's from lightning and RNA in the oceans.
Creationists - you get to keep God as the origin of Man and every other creature on Earth. it just means that God might not do everything as a minute rice miracle. SO WHAT. as far as you're concerned, God is still the guiding/creating hand behind everyone/everything on earth.
WHERE'S THE PROBLEM.
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
You are correct that statement is not 100% always the case. There are exceptions to every rule but that is the rule regardless.
Fellowship
Now that Fellowship has granted the ability of posters to make broad generalizations or rules as they are called in the aforequoted post, those of you who have said that all people who question evolution are religious zealots can now raise that flag again, slap a sticker on them, and throw a hootenany....
Originally posted by alcimedes
can anyone tell me why evolution can't just be God's hand in our world?
what requires Genesis to be taken literally? there are numerous passages (esp. when related directly to God) where figurative speech is used.
wtf is everyone arguing about?
Evolution backers - you get to keep evolution. you can believe it's from lightning and RNA in the oceans.
Creationists - you get to keep God as the origin of Man and every other creature on Earth. it just means that God might not do everything as a minute rice miracle. SO WHAT. as far as you're concerned, God is still the guiding/creating hand behind everyone/everything on earth.
WHERE'S THE PROBLEM.
Glad you asked. Did you know I had a professor in college who made fun of Christians twice a week at minimum? He did not believe evolution was reconcilable with creationism. He all but hit us over the head with how evolution is a closed system with NOTHING supernatural about it.
THIS is where the problem lies. If one such as I am a Christian and view life as a supernatural creation by a supernatural God I can not expect a theory with no supporting evidence that materialism in a closed system is how nothing became everything including life.
It is not a meshable two ideas.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Glad you asked. Did you know I had a professor in college who made fun of Christians twice a week at minimum? He did not believe evolution was reconcilable with creationism. He all but hit us over the head with how evolution is a closed system with NOTHING supernatural about it.
THIS is where the problem lies. If one such as I am a Christian and view life as a supernatural creation by a supernatural God I can not expect a theory with no supporting evidence that materialism in a closed system is how nothing became everything including life.
It is not a meshable two ideas.
Fellowship
is earth really a closed system? is anything, perhaps the universe but esoterics aside? i fail to understand your professor's claims...
It is not a meshable two ideas.
that's crap.
say i believe in evolution. i also believe Genesis. i believe that evolution is the hand of God creating the world, and all that's in it.
why can't God work through evolution? which part doesn't mesh?
who cares if people say evolution is a closed system. you think you can measure the will of God? didn't think so. the fact that specific creatures lived, died, evolved, can all be God's plan. God creates the Universe and all that's in it, so why can't he have had some lightning hit an RNA strand or 12 to set off evolution as we know it?
if you truly believe in an all powerful God, why do you think evolution is out of his grasp?
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Hassan you have not read a thing over this subject have you. I read over every link you provided and they add nothing to support Evolution. They all speculate based on guess.
Show me one and only one thing that is actual evidence for evolution.
Originally posted by billybobsky
is earth really a closed system? is anything, perhaps the universe but esoterics aside? i fail to understand your professor's claims...
Read this link..
Hassan and Alcimedes are also welcome.
The bottom line is information and chance are not the same.
Take a read of this Link
Fellowship
it's to retarded to live.
nothing is worse than when people insist on finding ways to disagree.
Originally posted by alcimedes
that's crap.
say i believe in evolution. i also believe Genesis. i believe that evolution is the hand of God creating the world, and all that's in it.
why can't God work through evolution? which part doesn't mesh?
who cares if people say evolution is a closed system. you think you can measure the will of God? didn't think so. the fact that specific creatures lived, died, evolved, can all be God's plan. God creates the Universe and all that's in it, so why can't he have had some lightning hit an RNA strand or 12 to set off evolution as we know it?
if you truly believe in an all powerful God, why do you think evolution is out of his grasp?
aclimedes you are free to believe anything you wish. That is all I am doing as well. I clearly answered your question. We all need to live and let live with our differences. I am not going to give you a hard time because you have a different view I did simply explain why I did not see it the same.
Fellowship
It is, frankly, a joke.
In the meantime, I've posted two links above. One of them shows how neanderthals are related to hom sap and we can tell because we have extracted mitochondrial DNA from neanderthal fossils and how we can see inherited resistance to insecticides in the genes of fruit flies.