Creation vs. Evolution

[PS]

I said I don't ALWAYS understand it. And you don't understand how life works. You may have a grasp of the biology of life. But you haven't a clue how life itself works. If you did, you could tell us why the Tusunami or hurricane Katrina happened. But you can't. So don't claim do undertand what you don't and can't.

WTH?


What do hurricanes and tsunamis have to do with life?

The hurricane was a result of air masses colliding and the tsunami was a result of an underwater landslide or earthquake (forget which). What part does "why" play in it?

The geological actions of the Earth have no "why" to them, they just do.


And how do I not understand how life works? It's actually very simple.

 

[Swift]

WTH?


What do hurricanes and tsunamis have to do with life?

The hurricane was a result of air masses colliding and the tsunami was a result of an underwater landslide or earthquake (forget which). What part does "why" play in it?

The geological actions of the Earth have no "why" to them, they just do.


And how do I not understand how life works? It's actually very simple.

My bad, see you said life. When I hear that, I think you're talking about life and the things that effect it. But, you weren't.

Anyway, do you understand why some children are born with defects and handicaps then?

 

[PS]

My bad, see you said life. When I hear that, I think you're talking about life and the things that effect it. But, you weren't.

Anyway, do you understand why some children are born with defects and handicaps then?

Chromosome and genetic hiccups. Some families/genepools are more prone to it than others, especially depending on the environment. A baby being born and raised in the mountains of BC with parents that don't smoke is much more likely to grow up without cancer/birth defects/dissabilities than a baby born and raised in Mexico city.

 

[Swift]

Chromosome and genetic hiccups. Some families/genepools are more prone to it than others, especially depending on the environment. A baby being born and raised in the mountains of BC with parents that don't smoke is much more likely to grow up without cancer/birth defects/dissabilities than a baby born and raised in Mexico city.

Ok, so you kinda know.

 

[PS]

Swift, I could go on for hours with the amounts of variations in an environment that could cause a genetic deformity. Toxins and poisons in the water, atmosphere, food, everything, all have a small contribution to how healthy a baby is born.

 

[DadtheWheel]

...judging by some of the other things said on this thread...it actually seemed plausable that someone would really think that...

I second that!

 

[Swift]

Swift, I could go on for hours with the amounts of variations in an environment that could cause a genetic deformity. Toxins and poisons in the water, atmosphere, food, everything, all have a small contribution to how healthy a baby is born.

So nature does effect life? The same one that you said didn't effect life?

 

[Famine]

Beautiful logic Famine. However, my take is that Dadthewheel posed a simple rhetorical question, and according to him, Earth is simply the dumbest person in the history of humanity. Quite what he is doing using a computer I don't know. Curious and curiouser.

A rhetorical question?

 

[Touring Mars]

Swift, I could go on for hours with the amounts of variations in an environment that could cause a genetic deformity. Toxins and poisons in the water, atmosphere, food, everything, all have a small contribution to how healthy a baby is born.

That's arguably true, but genetic mutations are random, whether caused by toxins/poisons etc. or not. But whether they are passed on to the next generation or not is entirely NON-random.

A mutation that causes early death will most likely not be passed on to the next generation. A mutation that means that a being is at a significant disadvantage compared to the general population will be much less likely to survive, hence only mutations that benefit (or atleast do not disadvantage) a creature in their given environment, will be passed on to the next generation...

A genetic 'defect' that has occured before but has thus far not caused disease (such as is seen in Multiple Sclerosis) is not really a mutation, since it is inherited and not (although it can be) the result of a random point mutation. But the fact that an individual carries the defect that makes them susceptible to the disease at all means that they (and their genes) are now less likely to survive long enough to procreate and hence pass on their genes.

Anyway, I'm no expert in genetics or genetic illnesses, but my main point was to stress that mutations that give rise to speciation are random, but the fact that they survive is completely not random.

 

[Famine]

The mechanics of mutations are important too.

A mutation in the DNA leads to a mutation in the RNA which leads to a mutation in the protein which may result in one of three things:

1. Retardation of protein function.
2. No change in protein function.
3. Enhancement of protein function.

Regardless of what the result ought to be, the net result of a mutation is almost ALWAYS #2, thanks to a family of proteins called "Chaperonins". They function by ensuring a protein folds correctly, thus they mask many potentially detrimental or beneficial mutations. But they have other functions - the lead Chaperonin is "HSP90", and the letters stand for "Heat Shock Protein". This has an alternate function that you might be able to guess from its name... When there's a serious thermal insult to the cell, HSP90 stops being a Chaperonin and leaves the job to other, less efficient Chaperonins, thus a catastrophic event can lead to a whole host of previously masked mutations being unleashed at once. This is, in part, a player in the post-crisis expansions we see dotted throughout the fossil records.

 

[PS]

So nature does effect life? The same one that you said didn't effect life?

Is nature not contained within the definition of "environment"?

 

[PS]

Sorry about the way I was talking about the genetic...............variations? I couldn't think of another word to describe the action of a gene messing up, causing Downne Syndrome and other slight deformities other than a mutation.

 

[Swift]

Is nature not contained within the definition of "environment"?

You said that Tsunami's and hurricanes just "do". Then you stated that things in the envioronment can and will directly effect life. So I'm just trying to understand how you keep the two seperate especially when you believe that life is a natural occurance of the environment.

 

[Danoff]

I defy anyone to follow the herbivore line in this graphic (ending in numbers 7 and 8) and tell me that doesn't look like a monkey. It's not a monkey, it's a species of hominid. It is early vegetarian man - which went extinct probably due to the lack of protein intake which scientists think kept their brains small.

http://www.theistic-evolution.com/pages5455.jpg

So many species of hominid over time. Where did all these fossils come from if not evolution?

In fact, evolution can be seen today. Recently a new species of vegetarian homind has come about.

 

[Earth]

So... you believe that asking people to read 2500 posts in this thread is MORE unreasonable than asking them to read the entire Bible (and, for reference, it's 26 pages for me - set it to 100 posts per page, it's much easier)?

Simply, almost every point currently being covered in this thread has already been covered - in most cases three or four times.

In 6 months lets say this topic grows to 300 pages. Should it be closed then? Or are you going to direct newcomers to look over 4,000 posts?

Also I'm not asking you to read the entire Bible. The creation account is summed up in 1 1/2 chapters, or a mere 5 minutes of reading.

Mind you, asking people what they know about creation "as stated in Genesis" is too. Creation "as stated in Genesis" is exactly that. Creation as stated in Genesis, with no room for deviation. It's a millenia-old account, using best ("best", not "most accurate") knowledge of the day to describe where we came from, with no allowance for future advances in knowledge.

I've noticed on many occasions you have said God 'poofed' things into existance or used a 'magic wand'. Complete falsehoods if you read Genesis seriously and understood it. That is why I doubt your knowledge of Genesis

If the writer of Genesis used knowledge of his day, he would have alot of mistakes in what he wrote, many of which could be repelled easily by modern science. But he didnt.

Believing God started the basic forms of life does not restrict future advancements of knowledge. God gave us a powerful brain for a reason. Not to simply have fun all day, but to learn about Him and his creation.

What do YOU know about creation, as stated in the Rig-Veda?

Nothing at all. Are you proposing Rig-Veda? If not then theres no need to go any further.

I defy anyone to follow the herbivore line in this graphic (ending in numbers 7 and 8) and tell me that doesn't look like a monkey. It's not a monkey, it's a species of hominid. It is early vegetarian man - which went extinct probably due to the lack of protein intake which scientists think kept their brains small.

http://www.theistic-evolution.com/pages5455.jpg

So many species of hominid over time. Where did all these fossils come from if not evolution?

15 skulls, some with less than a fraction of the original left. Some of which are said not to even be human. Is that a solid foundation to see 4 million years into our past?

Looking at your timeline I noticed none of the apeman are bent over, at any state. But the modern apes are bent over. The diagram probably meant to include it?

Also notice this illustration proves what I have been saying for a while now. Modern apes have no yesterday, no fossil record. Look at the blue and green trail they leave behind in the diagram. There is nothing there. Nothing.

No fossils of a 'common ancestor' have been found. Read the what the diagram says in the far bottom left. A common ancestor has no name, because it has not been found, and doesnt exist.

What bridges the gap between shrew-like creature and a phantom 'common ancestor'?

In fact, evolution can be seen today. Recently a new species of vegetarian homind has come about.

If he keeps up a vegetarian diet his brain isnt going to get any bigger? How many generations down the line before other meat eating humans surpass vegetarian humans?

I know im a little off topic but... what does this quote make to Christianity's theory of Trinity?

Your yourself said it.

Creationists just completely refuse to get into detail about what they think happened. I want that to change.

I'm still yet to hear a theory to be proposed by a creationist that tidily ties up what we KNOW happens regarding evolution AND works all the wacky stories into the timeline in a way that could potentially work, with no holes in the argument.

If creationists are gonna take the dinosaurs for themselves, they'd better propose their own historical timeline of 'events', all in specific order, that makes sense with what we KNOW of the evolutionary history of the planet. I want specific dates for particular events... where do creationists think things fit into the history of the world?

I dont know whether to reply to this or not. Seeing that you have acted like a complete jerk on many occasions, one side of me says dont waste your time. Another side says go ahead and type it out, because there may be interested ones here.

So I can type it out, only to have you mindlessly call it stupid, or I can type it out for those who are truly interested. If enough people want a 'timeline' of Genesis, then I may consider giving it.

But you have already dug yourself into the 'jerk' hole. You know, the people who are ignored by the general population? Try to dig yourself out by responding to what I type like you would if we were talking face to face. I know you're hiding behind a monitor, but try and reply like your not, OK?

 

[James2097]

I dont know whether to reply to this or not. Seeing that you have acted like a complete jerk on many occasions, one side of me says dont waste your time. Another side says go ahead and type it out, because there may be interested ones here.

So I can type it out, only to have you mindlessly call it stupid, or I can type it out for those who are truly interested. If enough people want a 'timeline' of Genesis, then I may consider giving it.

But you have already dug yourself into the 'jerk' hole. You know, the people who are ignored by the general population? Try to dig yourself out by responding to what I type like you would if we were talking face to face. I know you're hiding behind a monitor, but try and reply like your not, OK?

It was a serious request, and would obviously benefit the thread. I was genuinely interested, and if someone took the time to work it all out as best they could, of course I wouldn't call them stupid. I can't promise others won't however. The name calling is just plain lame. Kinda expected as many many people have already put you in the corner as the village idiot. I'm not going to reply with an insult, only to say if you wanted to have a serious debate it requires you actually understanding the evolutionist's point of view, something you keep refusing to do. That is why people have lacked patience for you.

I have always talked as if we were face-to-face. You better believe it! You really want a serious debate free from name calling? Sure! It requires you to do some pre-reading. This thread. Some of my comments were a little smart-assy but certainly born from a genuine frustration that every evolutionist felt about your lack of comprehension of the subject matter.

 

[code_kev]

I dont know whether to reply to this or not. Seeing that you have acted like a complete jerk on many occasions, one side of me says dont waste your time. Another side says go ahead and type it out, because there may be interested ones here.

So I can type it out, only to have you mindlessly call it stupid, or I can type it out for those who are truly interested. If enough people want a 'timeline' of Genesis, then I may consider giving it.

But you have already dug yourself into the 'jerk' hole. You know, the people who are ignored by the general population? Try to dig yourself out by responding to what I type like you would if we were talking face to face. I know you're hiding behind a monitor, but try and reply like your not, OK?

Which translates as "IM NOT ANSWERING YOUR DIFFICULT AWKWARD QUESTIONS WAAAAAAA, ILL JUST PRETEND TO BE OFFENDED TO GET OUT OF IT!!!1!", then again, prove us wrong. I personally would love to see what your time line looks like, so be the "bigger man", and do it. Try and back it up with some real evidence for a change too, that would be sweet. By all means, stick some Bible quotes in it, but realise, that we need more then that to be convinced, like you said about the skulls...

"15 skulls, some with less than a fraction of the original left. Some of which are said not to even be human. Is that a solid foundation to see 4 million years into our past?"

...a few words, wrote by God knows who is not foundation enough to prove to us what happened. Physical evidence collected by real scientists is needed. No, not AiG "scientists", proper unbiased scientists.

Can I also add, that's 15 skulls more proof then Creationism has EVER had, has, or ever will have.

You bang on about no fossils being found to prove a link, the irony! You believe every word of the Bible with out a SINGLE shred of evidence. Yes evolution has gaps, they just don't pretend to know everything, it's called a theory based on findings. Evolution is a sound theory, and has yet to be proven wrong by even the greatest minds in the field.

 

[Zardoz]

...Also notice this illustration proves what I have been saying for a while now. Modern apes have no yesterday, no fossil record. Look at the blue and green trail they leave behind in the diagram. There is nothing there. Nothing...

GAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!

Earth, you're driving us all insane!!! You might even kill some of us! We may have cerebral hemorraghes and die at our keyboards because of you!

For the love of all that you believe to be holy, that illustration was all about HOMINIDS! You see a pretty blue trail and a nice green one and say "HA!!! LOOK!!! There's the proof!"

Oh, yeah, bud? "No yesterday"? No fossil record? Well what about all these frickin' fossil apes?:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0306_030306_orangutanfossil.html

http://www.chineseprehistory.org/pics1.htm

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/fossils/apes/fossil_ape_overview.html

http://www.crystalinks.com/fossilsape.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6522090/

http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WALAPE.html

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000757B0-ACF7-1F09-97AE80A84189EEDF

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0006FD89-5BA7-1F18-B4FD80A84189EEDF

http://www.primates.com/history/

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/ape_ancestor_041118.html

http://www.unswpress.com.au/isbn/086840716X.htm


Huh, what about them!?

WHAT ABOUT THEM!?!?!?!?

 

[ledhed]

Look at the colors the prety red colors and the alrming shade of blue and the slightly off shade of green...ummm look at the colors ? ...umm I know I am but what are you ? ...ummm ape man...has ape in it ? You want a bannana for mr ape ? he's a hairy one isnt he ...do that red thing again .

 

[TheCracker]

God gave us a powerful brain for a reason. Not to simply have fun all day, but to learn about Him and his creation.

I prefere just to use mine to have fun all day, like reading your posts, thanks.

So I can type it out, only to have you mindlessly call it stupid, or I can type it out for those who are truly interested. If enough people want a 'timeline' of Genesis, then I may consider giving it.

Please, please consider supplying us with your wisdom on the Genesis 'timeline' - without sounding like a prophet from 'The Life of Brian'

 

[ledhed]

Earth ...I found the missing link !

http://forums.gttimes.com/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=5228

 

[Famine]

In 6 months lets say this topic grows to 300 pages. Should it be closed then? Or are you going to direct newcomers to look over 4,000 posts?

I'll say the same thing. If YOU can't be bothered to look over a thread you're actually interested in, why should anyone else be bothered to give you the answers which are already there?

Perhaps we shouldn't keep locking newbie threads, and directing them to use the search feature? After all, there's 1.7 million posts on GTPlanet.

I've noticed on many occasions you have said God 'poofed' things into existance or used a 'magic wand'. Complete falsehoods if you read Genesis seriously and understood it. That is why I doubt your knowledge of Genesis.

Actually, I haven't. I've directly stated that this DIDN'T happen, or used the rhetorical question form to describe this as an alternate "theory".

Out of interest, if God created the Heavens and the Earth, did they all appear at once (possibly describable by the word "poofed"), or did they slowly materialise out of the ether, like an inverse Cheshire Cat?

If the writer of Genesis used knowledge of his day, he would have alot of mistakes in what he wrote, many of which could be repelled easily by modern science. But he didnt.

Or rather he did. Genesis does not stand up to scientific testing and misses out huge chunks of factual information which would be relevant. Why? Because nobody knew about them back then.

Nothing at all. Are you proposing Rig-Veda? If not then theres no need to go any further.

It's a Creation account. If you're willing to accept one millennia-old Creation account, why summarily reject any other? Or is it just that because you believe in God, the Biblical account is correct (regardless of the myriad ways other Judeo-Christian sects interpret it) and any other account which disagrees is incorrect, regardless of what it says or whether you have any familiarity with it?

I know you're hiding behind a monitor

Must be hard for him to see what he's typing then.

 

[ledhed]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earth

I know you're hiding behind a monitor


Must be hard for him to see what he's typing then.

Must be the damm Midgets again . Dont you think so Famine ?

 

[Danoff]

15 skulls, some with less than a fraction of the original left. Some of which are said not to even be human. Is that a solid foundation to see 4 million years into our past?

Hominid. And though we may not be able to see perfectly 4 million years into the past, we should certainly try.

Looking at your timeline I noticed none of the apeman are bent over, at any state. But the modern apes are bent over. The diagram probably meant to include it?

True, what's your point? It's not a major change? Chimps can walk on 2 legs, so can apes.

Also notice this illustration proves what I have been saying for a while now. Modern apes have no yesterday, no fossil record. Look at the blue and green trail they leave behind in the diagram. There is nothing there. Nothing.

Woah, the diagram wasn't showing apes. There are plenty of ape fossils.

No fossils of a 'common ancestor' have been found. Read the what the diagram says in the far bottom left. A common ancestor has no name, because it has not been found, and doesnt exist.

Hasn't been found and doesn't exist are very different.

Look at that extinct line of heribvore human. Did God create that? Where does it say in the bible

"and god created a man that looked like a monkey and ate plants, and this man went extinct - and God saw that it was good."

 

[TheCracker]

Look at that extinct line of heribvore human. Did God create that? Where does it say in the bible

"and god created a man that looked like a monkey and ate plants, and this man went extinct - and God saw that it was good."

you mean:

"and god created a man that looked like a monkey and ate plants, and this man went extinct - and God saw that it wasn't so good and made a mental note to try harder next time with man beta version 1.2, other wise known as 'homosapian' (if for no other reason than to create school boy giggles when mentioned in biology class for millenia to come.)

 

[code_kev]

Everyone knows that they were put there to test out faith! Are you naive or something?

 

[Swift]

PS, looks like you may have unintentional missed this. So here it is again.

You said that Tsunami's and hurricanes just "do". Then you stated that things in the envioronment can and will directly effect life. So I'm just trying to understand how you keep the two seperate especially when you believe that life is a natural occurance of the environment.

 

[Danoff]

PS, looks like you may have unintentional missed this. So here it is again.

It's common practice among evolutionists to refer to man made things and humans in general as something other than natural. Man-made is often referred to as unnatural - when in fact everything is natural in the eyes of one who is convinced by evolution. Man is natural and so man's products are natural.

 

[Swift]

It's common practice among evolutionists to refer to man made things and humans in general as something other than natural. Man-made is often referred to as unnatural - when in fact everything is natural in the eyes of one who is convinced by evolution. Man is natural and so man's products are natural.

That's all well and good. But it doesn't explain how PS can understand life and not understand nature.

 

[code_kev]

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/subjectarchive/creationscience.html

If your easily offended (a wimp), I advise you don't go on this site. I found it damn funny personally.

"Since the Bible doesn't really talk about an Ice Age, it's clear that the secular notions of such an event are based on theory rather than fact. The fact is, that Noah might have seen a few snow flurries, if anything at all, but that's about it."

hahah