Ok, so if something is very complicated then it constitutes magic? That's a rather self-centered view.
Ok, so if something is very complicated then it constitutes magic? That's a rather self-centered view.
Well, from the OP: "I don't think that is what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they said Freedom of Religion. "
Seems like this is exactly what they had in mind.
straightalker
You are so full of crap. There are many transitional fossil records. No, there are not examples of every minute change over a time period, but many lines have enough examples to show the development clearly.
And yes, there is even good logic behind the idea of evolutionary surges. When an enviornment remained stable for long periods, radical changes in a species would likey provide little or no benefit, so, they did not propagate out of proportion to the general population. When a reletively fast (in geological terms) enviornmental change occured, most species had to adapt rapidly or die out. So, radical changes that provided survival advantages did propagate way out of proportion to the general population. An observer of this time frame would then see that, indeeed, there had been a spurt of evolutionary development in a short time.
You are so full of crap. There are many transitional fossil records. No, there are not examples of every minute change over a time period, but many lines have enough examples to show the development clearly.
And yes, there is even good logic behind the idea of evolutionary surges. When an enviornment remained stable for long periods, radical changes in a species would likey provide little or no benefit, so, they did not propagate out of proportion to the general population. When a reletively fast (in geological terms) enviornmental change occured, most species had to adapt rapidly or die out. So, radical changes that provided survival advantages did propagate way out of proportion to the general population. An observer of this time frame would then see that, indeeed, there had been a spurt of evolutionary development in a short time.
If the human body is so complex, why is it so poorly put together? For starters, why is our optic nerve connected to the eye on the wrong side? Why our are knees and back to fragile? That shows that if we were "designed" it was a by a complete idiot.
You forget something when you talk about the complexity of a human, it has a long time to be assembled. Billions of years have gone into making each part of our body.
Another thing about the fossil record, do you understand the sheer amount of luck it takes to have something be fossilized? A creature has to die in the right place and at the right time to covered in suitable minerals and protected from the enviroment to fossilize. Then, you have to have someone around to actually find the fossil, and recognize what is.
If what you say is correct on Gould, it just says that transitional fossils (which there are loads of, despite what creationists argue) occur so quickly and are unlikely to be found because of that. In other words, stuff happens quickly and evolution still occurs, so stfu with the creationism (I'm paraphrasing that last part).
And evolution is far from unsubstantiated. I really hate this creationist attack on science. The scientific method is one of the first things you learn in science classes. A scientific theory is as important as facts, which is why they're taught as them.
I don't think you were around then to make any claim that they intended for the U.S. to be a Religious Facsist State.
When if you don't accept God's account of Him creating us, then you must explain where we came from.
Creating a jet liner in a hurricane is overdoing it tho...
I'll give you a car and its 4th tire with appropiate lugnuts, tire iron and jack next to it...I'll also give you 10 billion years....the tire needs to get on the car and inflate itself ...oh, and regrow its rubber tread from all the sun damage of 10 billion years....one more thing, im sorry...somehow grow a metal vein of sorts (brake line) that connects somehow to the rim.....oops 1 more thing...a fluid INSIDE the metal vein (blood/brake fluid) because fluid doesnt compress....I'll let the other 3 brakelines 'Slide' and say they were allready there.
Remember that 'somewhat rapid change in your enviroment takes you 10,000 years to adapt to...
Proverbs 14:12:
12 There is a way that seems right to a man,
but in the end it leads to death
Creating a jet liner in a hurricane is overdoing it tho...
I'll give you a car and its 4th tire with appropiate lugnuts, tire iron and jack next to it...I'll also give you 10 billion years....the tire needs to get on the car and inflate itself ...oh, and regrow its rubber tread from all the sun damage of 10 billion years....one more thing, im sorry...somehow grow a metal vein of sorts (brake line) that connects somehow to the rim.....oops 1 more thing...a fluid INSIDE the metal vein (blood/brake fluid) because fluid doesnt compress....I'll let the other 3 brakelines 'Slide' and say they were allready there.
Remember that 'somewhat rapid change in your enviroment takes you 10,000 years to adapt to...
Proverbs 14:12:
12 There is a way that seems right to a man,
but in the end it leads to death
Mutations of any kind are believed to occur once in every 100,000 gene replications (though some estimate they occur far less frequently). Davis, 68; Wysong, 272. Assuming that the first single-celled organism had 10,000 genes, the same number as E. coli (Wysong, 113), one mutation would exist for every ten cells. Since only one mutation per 1,000 is non-harmful (Davis, 66), there would be only one non-harmful mutation in a population of 10,000 such cells. The odds that this one non-harmful mutation would affect a particular gene, however, is 1 in 10,000 (since there are 10,000 genes). Therefore, one would need a population of 100,000,000 cells before one of them would be expected to possess a non-harmful mutation of a specific gene.
The odds of a single cell possessing non-harmful mutations of five specific (functionally related) genes is the product of their separate probabilities. Morris, 63. In other words, the probability is 1 in 108 X 108 X 108 X 108 X 108, or 1 in 1040. If one hundred trillion (1014) bacteria were produced every second for five billion years (1017 seconds), the resulting population (1031) would be only 1/1,000,000,000 of what was needed!
But even this is not the whole story. These are the odds of getting just any kind of non-harmful mutations of five related genes. In order to create a new structure, however, the mutated genes must integrate or function in concert with one another. According to Professor Ambrose, the difficulties of obtaining non-harmful mutations of five related genes "fade into insignificance when we recognize that there must be a close integration of functions between the individual genes of the cluster, which must also be integrated into the development of the entire organism." Davis, 68.
In addition to this, the structure resulting from the cluster of the five integrated genes must, in the words of Ambrose, "give some selective advantage, or else become scattered once more within the population at large, due to interbreeding." Bird, 1:87. Ambrose concludes that "it seems impossible to explain [the origin of increased complexity] in terms of random mutations alone." Bird, 1:87.
When one considers that a structure as "simple" as the wing on a fruit fly involves 30-40 genes (Bird, 1:88), it is mathematically absurd to think that random genetic mutations can account for the vast diversity of life on earth. Even Julian Huxley, a staunch evolutionist who made assumptions very favorable to the theory, computed the odds against the evolution of a horse to be 1 in 10-300,000. (thats 300,000 zeros.. i couldnt get to show correcty)Pitman, 68.
refrences
Bird, W.R., The Origin of Species Revisited (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991; originally published by Philosophical Library in 1987). Bird graduated summa cum laude from Vanderbilt University and has a J.D. degree from Yale Law School. He has published articles in numerous law journals and represented the State of Louisiana in the challenge to its "creation statute." Both volumes of this work are extensively documented with references to the pertinent scientific literature.
Davis, Percival and Dean H. Kenyon, Of Pandas and People (Dallas: Haughton Publishing Co. 1990). Davis has an M.A. degree from Columbia University and is a life science professor at Hillsborough Community College. Kenyon has a Ph.D. in biophysics from Stanford and is Professor of Biology at San Francisco State University. He is the co-author of Biochemical Predestination published by McGraw-Hill in 1969. The Academic Editor of Of Pandas and People was Charles B. Thaxton who has a Ph.D. in chemistry from Iowa State University and is the co-author of The Mystery of Life's Origin published by the Philosophical Library in 1984.
Fix, William R., The Bone Peddlers (New York: Macmillan PUblishing, 1984). Fix has an M.A. degree in behavioral science from Simon Fraser University (Canada) and is the author of several books.
Grassé, Pierre-P., Evolution of Living Organisms (New York: Academic Press, 1977). Grassé is France's most distinguished zoologist. Dobzhansky has described his knowledge of the living world as "encyclopedic."
Morris, Henry M. and Gary E. Parker, What is Creation Science (San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1982). Morris has a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering from the University of Minnesota. Parker has a M.S. and Ed.D. in biology from Ball State University.
Pitman, Michael, Adam and Evolution (London: Rider & Co., 1984). Pitman has a B.A. degree in science from Open University (England), a M.A. degree in classics from Oxford, and teaches biology in Cambridge, England. The introduction is by Dr. Bernard Stonehouse, a scientist who has held academic posts at Oxford, Yale, and other prestigious universities.
Sunderland, Luther D., Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 3d ed. (Santee, CA: Master Book Publishers, 1984). Sunderland had a B.S. from Penn. State University and worked as an aerospace engineer with General Electric specializing in automatic flight control systems (died 1987).
Varghese, Roy Abraham, ed., The Intellectuals Speak Out About God (Chicago: Regenery Gateway, 1984). Those quoted are Robert Jastrow and Chandra Wickramasinghe. ...Wickramisinghe is an internationally recognized authority on interstellar matter and is the head of the department of applied mathematics and astronomy at University College in Cardiff, Wales.
Wysong, Randy L., The Creation-Evolution Controversy (Midland, MI: Inquiry Press, 1976). Wysong has a B.S. and D.V.M. from Michigan State University
The odds of a single cell possessing non-harmful mutations of five specific (functionally related) genes is the product of their separate probabilities. Morris, 63. In other words, the probability is 1 in 108 X 108 X 108 X 108 X 108, or 1 in 1040. If one hundred trillion (1014) bacteria were produced every second for five billion years (1017 seconds), the resulting population (1031) would be only 1/1,000,000,000 of what was needed!
But even this is not the whole story. These are the odds of getting just any kind of non-harmful mutations of five related genes. In order to create a new structure, however, the mutated genes must integrate or function in concert with one another. According to Professor Ambrose, the difficulties of obtaining non-harmful mutations of five related genes "fade into insignificance when we recognize that there must be a close integration of functions between the individual genes of the cluster, which must also be integrated into the development of the entire organism." Davis, 68.
In addition to this, the structure resulting from the cluster of the five integrated genes must, in the words of Ambrose, "give some selective advantage, or else become scattered once more within the population at large, due to interbreeding." Bird, 1:87. Ambrose concludes that "it seems impossible to explain [the origin of increased complexity] in terms of random mutations alone." Bird, 1:87.
When one considers that a structure as "simple" as the wing on a fruit fly involves 30-40 genes (Bird, 1:88), it is mathematically absurd to think that random genetic mutations can account for the vast diversity of life on earth. Even Julian Huxley, a staunch evolutionist who made assumptions very favorable to the theory, computed the odds against the evolution of a horse to be 1 in 10-300,000. (thats 300,000 zeros.. i couldnt get to show correcty)Pitman, 68.
refrences
Bird, W.R., The Origin of Species Revisited (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991; originally published by Philosophical Library in 1987). Bird graduated summa cum laude from Vanderbilt University and has a J.D. degree from Yale Law School. He has published articles in numerous law journals and represented the State of Louisiana in the challenge to its "creation statute." Both volumes of this work are extensively documented with references to the pertinent scientific literature.
Davis, Percival and Dean H. Kenyon, Of Pandas and People (Dallas: Haughton Publishing Co. 1990). Davis has an M.A. degree from Columbia University and is a life science professor at Hillsborough Community College. Kenyon has a Ph.D. in biophysics from Stanford and is Professor of Biology at San Francisco State University. He is the co-author of Biochemical Predestination published by McGraw-Hill in 1969. The Academic Editor of Of Pandas and People was Charles B. Thaxton who has a Ph.D. in chemistry from Iowa State University and is the co-author of The Mystery of Life's Origin published by the Philosophical Library in 1984.
Fix, William R., The Bone Peddlers (New York: Macmillan PUblishing, 1984). Fix has an M.A. degree in behavioral science from Simon Fraser University (Canada) and is the author of several books.
Grassé, Pierre-P., Evolution of Living Organisms (New York: Academic Press, 1977). Grassé is France's most distinguished zoologist. Dobzhansky has described his knowledge of the living world as "encyclopedic."
Morris, Henry M. and Gary E. Parker, What is Creation Science (San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1982). Morris has a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering from the University of Minnesota. Parker has a M.S. and Ed.D. in biology from Ball State University.
Pitman, Michael, Adam and Evolution (London: Rider & Co., 1984). Pitman has a B.A. degree in science from Open University (England), a M.A. degree in classics from Oxford, and teaches biology in Cambridge, England. The introduction is by Dr. Bernard Stonehouse, a scientist who has held academic posts at Oxford, Yale, and other prestigious universities.
Sunderland, Luther D., Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 3d ed. (Santee, CA: Master Book Publishers, 1984). Sunderland had a B.S. from Penn. State University and worked as an aerospace engineer with General Electric specializing in automatic flight control systems (died 1987).
Varghese, Roy Abraham, ed., The Intellectuals Speak Out About God (Chicago: Regenery Gateway, 1984). Those quoted are Robert Jastrow and Chandra Wickramasinghe. ...Wickramisinghe is an internationally recognized authority on interstellar matter and is the head of the department of applied mathematics and astronomy at University College in Cardiff, Wales.
Wysong, Randy L., The Creation-Evolution Controversy (Midland, MI: Inquiry Press, 1976). Wysong has a B.S. and D.V.M. from Michigan State University
Of course you must read what Charles Darwin himself wrote in his Origin of Species book
THE QUOTE: From the Origin of Species, CHAPTER VI - DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY
"Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms, in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility.
THE QUOTE: From the Origin of Species, CHAPTER VI - DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY
"Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms, in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility.
Had the OP said that, I would agree, however he was clearly talking about his perceived "talibanization" of the U.S. He then draws a line under which he talks about the KY museum. As I've said, these people can feel free to worship as they wish, believe what they wish and even spend $25 Mil in private funds to try and get other people to believe what they believe.
And yet that doesn't exempt them from ridicule when their beliefs run contrary to reality. Say something stupid and you'll be recognized for it.
Gibsons...Im assuming you are referring to the first assumption
"Mutations of any kind are believed to occur once in every 100,000 gene replications (though some estimate they occur far less frequently). "
Either way the first real assumption is that there is no God
"Mutations of any kind are believed to occur once in every 100,000 gene replications (though some estimate they occur far less frequently). "
Either way the first real assumption is that there is no God
8-2-2006 Evolution opponents lose control of Kansas Board of Education
Conservative Republicans who pushed anti-evolution standards back into Kansas schools last year have lost control of the state Board of Education once again.
The most closely watched race was in western Kansas, where incumbent conservative Connie Morris lost her GOP primary Tuesday.
The former teacher had described evolution as "an age-old fairy tale'' and "a nice bedtime story'' unsupported by science.
As a result of Tuesday's vote, board members and candidates who believe evolution is well-supported by evidence will have a 6-4 majority. Evolution skeptics had entered the election with a 6-4 majority.
Control of the school board has slipped into, out of and back into conservative Republicans' hands since 1998, resulting in anti-evolution standards in 1999, evolution-friendly ones in 2001 and anti-evolution ones again last year.
Conservative Republicans who pushed anti-evolution standards back into Kansas schools last year have lost control of the state Board of Education once again.
The most closely watched race was in western Kansas, where incumbent conservative Connie Morris lost her GOP primary Tuesday.
The former teacher had described evolution as "an age-old fairy tale'' and "a nice bedtime story'' unsupported by science.
As a result of Tuesday's vote, board members and candidates who believe evolution is well-supported by evidence will have a 6-4 majority. Evolution skeptics had entered the election with a 6-4 majority.
Control of the school board has slipped into, out of and back into conservative Republicans' hands since 1998, resulting in anti-evolution standards in 1999, evolution-friendly ones in 2001 and anti-evolution ones again last year.
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
Hey, you seem to think yourself expert on evolution and biology, you can't find them? hint: The assumptions are unstated. Whether they're ustated because of malice or ignorance I can only guess.
But, if you'd like, I can pick apart the assumption about the mutation rate as well. Just tell me exactly how that datum was generated - what exactly defines a gene and a mutation according the parameters of whoever came up with it, and in what system they did it.
CHOPPER GOD
Your statement "Either way the first real assumption is that there is no God" has become the most tiresome lie from the creationists. It is a lie designed to draw an artificial line between believers and "the others". To create fear among the believers that support for evolution will brand them as being against god among their peers and subject them to the wrath of those peers.
Evolutionary theory makes NO assumptions about any gods, period! It only deals with the development of species. But it is very hard to argue against well supported science when you really have no facts, and FUD is, after all, a powerful weapon.
Your statement "Either way the first real assumption is that there is no God" has become the most tiresome lie from the creationists. It is a lie designed to draw an artificial line between believers and "the others". To create fear among the believers that support for evolution will brand them as being against god among their peers and subject them to the wrath of those peers.
Evolutionary theory makes NO assumptions about any gods, period! It only deals with the development of species. But it is very hard to argue against well supported science when you really have no facts, and FUD is, after all, a powerful weapon.
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter