• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Evolution questions...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.

Ask her if she believes in microevolution, since that usually depends on the surroundings of a species and how they adapt to those surroundings
 
The art of breeding = "micro-evolution."

People have known for centuries that you can breed animals to emphasize certain traits. It is very old news.

But breeders have found that there are limits to breeding. People have been breeding horses, dogs, sheep, cattle, etc since the dawn of human civilization, but no one has even been able to breed horses into becoming something that is not a horse, or breeding dogs to become something that is not a dog, etc.

There is no evidence for macro-evolution.
 
well, no one has ever done this for even a million years (breeding), and the earth is 4.5 billion years old I think. a billion is a thousand million, to do this experiment correctly would take a very long time.
 
The art of breeding = "micro-evolution."

People have known for centuries that you can breed animals to emphasize certain traits. It is very old news.

But breeders have found that there are limits to breeding. People have been breeding horses, dogs, sheep, cattle, etc since the dawn of human civilization, but no one has even been able to breed horses into becoming something that is not a horse, or breeding dogs to become something that is not a dog, etc.

There is no evidence for macro-evolution.

Ditto

well, no one has ever done this for even a million years (breeding), and the earth is 4.5 billion years old I think. a billion is a thousand million, to do this experiment correctly would take a very long time.

Exactly. Because the experiment would take millions of years, you can't prove it.
 
I can't belive people don't just go to the museum and see all the proof of evolution, it's right there in plain sight.

It's cool if people want to also want to believe in god and creation... why not creation with evolution? is your god so weak he can't create an organism that evolves?
 
Originally posted by: LAUST
I can't belive people don't just go to the museum and see all the proof of evolution, it's right there in plain sight.

It's cool if people want to also want to believe in god and creation... why not creation with evolution? is your god so weak he can't create an organism that evolves?

Thank you.

However, for people like me this is old news.

I don't know why some people can only see black & white, no gray.
 
Originally posted by: wizardLRU
Originally posted by: LAUST
I can't belive people don't just go to the museum and see all the proof of evolution, it's right there in plain sight.

It's cool if people want to also want to believe in god and creation... why not creation with evolution? is your god so weak he can't create an organism that evolves?

Thank you.

However, for people like me this is old news.

I don't know why some people can only see black & white, no gray.
I'm not sure either 🙁
 
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.

So where did things like AIDS, ebola and west nile come from? They didn't exist 50 years ago.


 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.

So where did things like AIDS, ebola and west nile come from? They didn't exist 50 years ago.

Links, I need sources for that statement sir.

Ahh yes, and no eyewitness accounts will be tolerated
 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.

So where did things like AIDS, ebola and west nile come from? They didn't exist 50 years ago.



god made them.



of course!
 
Originally posted by: wizardLRU

Links, I need sources for that statement sir.

Ahh yes, and no eyewitness accounts will be tolerated

Why do you need a link for that?? Don't you read the newspaper??

 
Originally posted by: LAUST
I can't belive people don't just go to the museum and see all the proof of evolution, it's right there in plain sight.

It's cool if people want to also want to believe in god and creation... why not creation with evolution? is your god so weak he can't create an organism that evolves?


No, Hes so great He did it all from scratch. Bible is very clear, 'each according to their kind'. Contrary to what people say, this is exactly what the fossile record shows. Not one 'intermediary' species can be found. Disagree? Point me to some research that shows them. Before you answer, make sure you know what the term means!


I was just talking with a friend who is a die hard evolutionist. He was telling me about a class he took. Philosophy of Biology. In it they discuss probability. According to mathematical probability evolution could have never occured. The odds of it are something on the order of 1 in 10x10^1000 or something like that. Anything with probability of more than 23rd power of ten is considered impossible (not sure of the numbers, but he majored in math and stays up late at night wondering about the value of 1...) Anywho, according to math it can't happen.

Also, according to recent research into dark matter they came upon a bit of a new (old) discovery. The universe is accelerating (decelerating...I don't remember). Point is this shows that the universe is much younger than previously thought. Billions and Billions of years for life to evolve gets wittled down to millions when you take other factors into account: formation of the planets and them being the proper age to support life being the biggest.

Food for thought.
 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: bigdog1218
I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.

So where did things like AIDS, ebola and west nile come from? They didn't exist 50 years ago.


They are viruses, technically not a living organism. Even still they are just DNA that keeps changing as they replicate. With each new host a new strain is developed. Over time these manifest themselves differenty, affecting different organs and systems. However, no matter how they change they are still a virus. Protein capsule with a soft chewey DNA middle.

They are like dogs. Given enough breeding time you could create thousands of new breeds. Evolution? Yes...micro. Macro...nope, not seen in nature. Its only found in scientific text books (which are often flawed...ever hear of Lucy? Ebriotic human gill slits? Even a prehistoric man in the Smithsonian....all either bad science or outright fraud.)
 
Originally posted by: DougyDanger


Also, according to recent research into dark matter they came upon a bit of a new (old) discovery. The universe is accelerating (decelerating...I don't remember). Point is this shows that the universe is much younger than previously thought. Billions and Billions of years for life to evolve gets wittled down to millions when you take other factors into account: formation of the planets and them being the proper age to support life being the biggest.

Food for thought.


That statement is fallacious on a couple levels.

1) The methodology used to determine the age of the universe is different from that used the determine the age of the earth. So the results are independent.

2) The uncertainty for the age of the universe right now is about 3-5 billion years. It's pretty substantial, but it's not the "billions to millions" orders of magnitude you make it out to be.


 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: bigdog1218 I'm catholic, I don't believe in macroevolution, but I do believe that microevolution does occur. Darwin based most of his ideas of evolution from the microevolution that he thought he witnessed in the Galagapos islands. He and other people then decided that because microevolution was witnessed, these little changes add up over time to create new species, which has never actually been proven, no matter how much you wish it has.
So where did things like AIDS, ebola and west nile come from? They didn't exist 50 years ago.

Yes they did exist over 50 years ago - just in very small numbers. And, also, at that time nobody knew what they were called and that they even existed.
 
THIS is a great site for the real science against evolution.

and just for fun, a few short excerpts from the site...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I ALMOST STARVED working as a stand-up science comic. Science just isn't that funny. It's tough to put a funny spin on angular momentum. You can make the obvious joke about the Ideal Gas Law; but what can you say after you have talked about the Ideal Bean? I was just about to quit. Then I discovered the Theory of Evolution. Now the jokes just write themselves. The tough part is keeping a straight face. How can you describe how a cow evolved into a whale without laughing yourself silly? To learn about the wacky world of evolution, write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556 and ask for a sample copy of our newsletter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEX IS HARD for the theory of evolution to explain. Why would simple organisms, which can reproduce all by themselves, evolve into creatures that need a mate? What is the advantage that sexual reproduction gives that results in a victory in the struggle for survival? How could male and female varieties evolve simultaneously? Why would the opposite sexes be drawn to each other? How would they know what to do once they found each other? It doesn't make much sense. It makes more sense to write for a free copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you know that since 1860, the "known" age of the Earth has doubled every 20 years? If you would like to discover other surprising scientific facts, write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. Box 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-0923 and ask for a free copy of our newsletter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MISSING LINKS WANTED by evolutionists. You can obtain fame and fortune by selling missing links (genuine or not) to evolutionists. Take a human skull, an ape's jaw, stain them to make them look old, and call them Cro-Magnon Man! With nothing more than a single pig's tooth and lots of imagination, you create Nebraska Man. Take some ape bones and human bones, claim they were found together, and you will have skeletal remains of Java Man and Peking Man, just like you find in the museums! Yes, you can make big money selling missing links to evolutionists, but you must act NOW! The theory of evolution is crumbling fast, so you must sell your phony artifacts while there is still time. For more information write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DNA EVIDENCE FAILED to prove O.J. guilty. It also failed to prove evolution true. If evolution were true, one might expect the oldest, least developed forms of life to have the fewest chromosomes. It isn't too surprising that a worm has 2 chromosomes, and a mosquito has 6. Man has 46 chromosomes, so he is almost as highly developed as a potato, which has 48. Maybe some day man will evolve into a goldfish (94) or even a shrimp (254). Goldfish and shrimp are similar to the fossils found at the bottom of the geologic column, which evolutionists claim are the most primitive forms of life. The DNA evidence looks bad for evolution. To learn more incriminating evidence, write for one free copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EVERYONE KNOWS LIFE HAPPENS. Pinocchio and Frosty are documented cases. Although all experiments have failed to produce 12 of the 20 necessary amino acids from the postulated primordial soup, everyone who has been educated in an American public school knows that success in 8 cases proves that all 20 can form naturally by chance. Given a tide pool with all 20 amino acids, experiments have produced just 2 of the 4 necessary proteins necessary for life [please note correction by following this link.]. That's enough to claim success. Anyone with half a brain can see how all these chemicals can form a nucleus, cytoplasm, and cell membrane by chance. All that remains is to inject life into the cell. This is left as an exercise for the reader. (Hint: You need a dark and stormy night, a lightening rod, well-grounded slab, a deformed assistant, and a big switch.) This is the rock-solid foundation upon which the theory of evolution rests. If you are skeptical, write for a free copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALCHEMISTS AND EVOLUTIONISTS aren't much different. Alchemists wanted to believe that it was possible to turn lead into gold. Although they claimed to be scientists, their greed made them reject scientific reality. Evolutionists want to believe that ammonia can turn itself into a living cell. They, too, reject scientific reality for personal reasons. But the 19th century theory of evolution is withering under the scrutiny of 20th century science. As we move toward the 21st century, scientific acceptance of evolution is dropping. Someday evolutionists will be as hard to find as alchemists. If you would like to learn more about the demise of evolution, write for a free sample copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A PIG'S TOOTH by any other name is Nebraska man. Evolutionists found a single tooth in Nebraska that seemed to be half way between a human tooth and an ape tooth. They claimed they had found conclusive proof of the missing link between ape and man. The tooth was later positively identified as a pig's tooth, but by this time textbooks were filled with artists' conceptions of Nebraska man, showing him to be a hairy ape-man with poor posture. All that was missing was the football. To find out more about Nebraska man, Java man, Cro-Magnon man, Neanderthal man, Lucy, and other missing links, write for one free copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TABLOID HEADLINES SAY shocking things like, "Lizard Born With Feathers", and "Bird Hatches From Lizard Egg". You wouldn't expect to read stories like these in scientific journals, but these are two popular explanations for how reptiles evolved into birds. If your inquiring mind wants more than tabloid science, write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556. Ask for a free copy of our newsletter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EVOLUTIONISTS CLAIM THAT when reptiles evolved into mammals, three bones in their jaws moved to the side of their heads and became the hammer, anvil, and stirrup in the mammals' ears. If you believe that, I've got a newsletter I'd like to sell you. I'll even give you the first issue free. Just write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITH ENEMIES LIKE Stephen J. Gould, who needs friends? In his book Dinosaur in a Haystack, this champion of evolution poses an interesting variation of the chicken-and-egg problem. He notes that bees can't live without flowers, and flowers can't reproduce without bees. There are so many particular kinds of insects that are associated with particular flowers, it is as if they were made for each other. The theory of evolution says that insects and flowers must have evolved at the same time in a codependent relationship. Gould suggests that the way to test this hypothesis is to examine the fossil record and see if the increase in the number of species of insects correlates with the increase in the number of species of flowers. He reports that studies in 1993 found no correlation. Then he quotes a story in the May 23, 1995 edition of the New York Times that reports the discovery of a 220 million year old bee hive, which predates all flowers by 100 million years. Gould's lame explanation: "Perhaps bees first pollinated gymnosperms [cone-bearing woody plants without flowers], and therefore lived for most of their history in a world without flowers, and only much later developed an evolutionary relationship with newfangled angiosperms [flowering plants]." Perhaps you would like to develop a relationship with our newfangled newsletter. Write to us for a free sample issue. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CALL THE PSYCHIC Evolutionist Friends Network for the answers to life's mysteries. Ask how reptile jaws became mammal ears, cows became whales, and how bees lived for 100 million years before the first flower. (95¢/min. You must be 18. For entertainment only.) But if you prefer science to fantastic psychic speculation, write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556, and ask for one free copy of our newsletter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SANTA CLAUS EXISTS! That's what you would believe if you believed the logic used by evolutionists to prove the theory of evolution. For a point by point comparison of the proof of Santa Claus and the proof of evolution, read The Santa Similarity in the December issue of Disclosure. For a free sample copy of our newsletter write to Science Against Evolution, BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE PANDA'S THUMB is claimed to be one of the most convincing pieces of evidence for evolution. Evolutionists say that God would not have given the panda such a poorly designed thumb, so it must have evolved. Their argument is based entirely on theology, not science. For a scientific (not religious) look at the evidence against evolution, write for a free sample copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. Box 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FRANKENCELL DRIFTED AIMLESSLY, a lifeless crouton in the primordial soup. This fortunate congregation of amino acids, proteins, and sugars (brought together by chance) was patiently waiting for a bolt of lightening to inject in it the spark of life--or toast it. Is this how life began? Find out on the fourth Friday of March (the 28th) when Science Against Evolution presents the video, "Is Life Just Chemistry?" Fourth Friday Free Films are shown the fourth Friday of every month at 7:30 PM in the Kern County Public Library. (The library closes at 6, so you must enter through the back door at the southwest corner of the building.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NUMBER FIVE IS ALIVE! At least, that was the claim in the movie Short Circuit. Lightening struck robot number 5, bringing him to life. The scientists in the film thought he was simply malfunctioning, but life is not just a malfunction. Dr. Michael Girouard, M.D. tells the scientific reasons why life can't just happen by chance in the video, "Is Life Just Chemistry?" which will be shown at 7:30 PM, Friday, March 28, at the Kern County Public Library. Fourth Friday Free Films are sponsored by Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Q: WHY DO ELEPHANTS paint their toenails red? A: So they can hide in cherry trees. Q: Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree? A: No. Q: It works pretty well, doesn't it?" What does this old joke have to do with evolution? You would know if you subscribed to Disclosure. Write for a free sample copy. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SIZE DOESN'T MATTER! You can't tell how smart a man is by the size of his head. Gorillas have larger brains than chimps, but they aren't smarter. Evolutionists claim to know how smart extinct apes and people were by measuring the size of their skulls. That isn't smart. It is smarter to write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556, for a free copy of our newsletter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE MOON FALLS UP! The Apollo 11 astronauts left a laser reflector on the Moon which has allowed scientists on the ground to measure the distance between the Earth and the Moon very accurately. They discovered that the Moon gets 4 cm farther away from the Earth every year. Find out why, and what this means to the theory of evolution, in the current issue of Disclosure. Write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556 and ask for your free copy.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AT SONNY BONO'S funeral, Cher said that she once thought Mount Rushmore was a natural phenomenon. That got a big laugh because it is silly to think that the busts of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt, could have been formed by chance and natural processes. Isn't it even sillier to believe that those four presidents themselves were formed by natural processes? Write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. Box 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556, for a free sample copy of our newsletter.
 
Whenever the topic of "evolution vs. creation vs. whatever" comes up it inevitably becomes a matter of beliefs. I for one believe that God created the universe and all the life within. I mean who really wants to believe that we started as primordial slime? Then the question: why does the world/universe have so many problems? Well, because sin entered the world very early on and still exists today and human beings are not inherently good as some religions teach. When it comes down to it, no matter what you believe, you have to have faith in something/someone. I don't have time right now to link to or quote specific research, but I have seen way more scientific proof that the Bible is correct over anything else. When I discuss this with co-workers or whoever, they seem to vehemently deny this. Why? Because they are afraid of what they leads to. That is, if the Bible is correct, then they might actually have to change their beliefs,lifestyle,actions,etc. Well, that's just my take. I welcome any further discussion.
 
Originally posted by: rbloedow


Yes they did exist over 50 years ago - just in very small numbers. And, also, at that time nobody knew what they were called and that they even existed.

Your argument doesn't work for ebola. It kills so many people so fast that someone would have noticed very quickly.
 
Originally posted by: DougyDanger

They are viruses, technically not a living organism. Even still they are just DNA that keeps changing as they replicate. With each new host a new strain is developed. Over time these manifest themselves differenty, affecting different organs and systems. However, no matter how they change they are still a virus. Protein capsule with a soft chewey DNA middle.

heh, based on your definition then, yeah I guess evolution isn't possible. No matter how much you change a vertebrate, it's still a vertebrate. I mean, a rat and a human are pretty much the same thing, they're just different size sacks of skin and bones.

 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: DougyDanger


Also, according to recent research into dark matter they came upon a bit of a new (old) discovery. The universe is accelerating (decelerating...I don't remember). Point is this shows that the universe is much younger than previously thought. Billions and Billions of years for life to evolve gets wittled down to millions when you take other factors into account: formation of the planets and them being the proper age to support life being the biggest.

Food for thought.


That statement is fallacious on a couple levels.

1) The methodology used to determine the age of the universe is different from that used the determine the age of the earth. So the results are independent.

2) The uncertainty for the age of the universe right now is about 3-5 billion years. It's pretty substantial, but it's not the "billions to millions" orders of magnitude you make it out to be.

1) True to an extent. Not long ago the Earth was said to be almost as old as the universe now is though to be. When the univers is getting younger the age of the earth needed to be looked at again. You can't have a 10billion year old ear in a 14billion year old universe.

2) We are taught evolution has billions of years, but that is not so. The millions refers to the 'viable' portion of the universe's age, not its actual age. So even if the universe were 14billion years old, evolution would only have millions as it needs a perfect environment. One that would take much of that 14 billion years of time to form and then would only be in such a state for a short portion of its life. Take pro athletes. They live say, 70 years. Do they have that long to win a championship? Not really. Only during maybe 20 years of that time are they able to persue that goal.


More about viruses since you seem to lump them in with animals. Ebola could have been around long before 1950. There are parts of Africa we still have not found. Who knows what viruses are lurking there waiting to be found. For all we know ebola could have been killing people thousands of years ago. Africa isn't exacly known for being the fastest to get news to the press if you know what I mean. But still....a virus is a virus is a virus. Your point?
 
Back
Top