I'm curious what schools these people are going to where they don't really learn evolution (or perhaps not really taught it).
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Personally, IMHO, evolution has too many unexplained gaps that even science cant fill. The fossil record which is our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. In other words, there is no proof of any kind of a "missing link".
The evidence that "pre-men" (ape-men) existed is dubious at best. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds. Again, scientific proof, but none of a missing link. But the more we dig, the more we keep finding the same forms over and over again, never anything close to a transitional creature.
There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even single cell life firms are so complex that man has yet to create a living organism that hasnt already been known.
These are just two examples. There is a study called Darwin's Black Box which scientifically explains those two facts. It is very damning evidence AGAINST evolution.
As far as Adam and Eve go...if you translate the original text from scripture (Hebrew), it clearly leaves open the possibility that Adam and Eve were the FIRST humans created, but certainly not the only. So, that would explain that.
That would be like my geology teacher not 'believing' in the tectonic plate theory...it is fundamental to the entire science, if you don't understand it you probably shouldnt be teaching it :| !
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Actually, to correct you, it's called an informed opinion. Every day there is more and more scientific proof that evolution did not happen the way evolutionists thought. Another way to say it, is those who have researched and looked at science cant deny the proof that the thoery of evolution is full of blatent flaws.
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
if "they" dont believe in evolution - what else so they believe ? Dont come me with the ID-cr@p or i'll leave that thread before even an halfway intelligent discussion has started.
Anyway the other theories - WHICH ONES ?, i dont count religious fables as concurrent theories nor ID)... so i just assume "evolution" as the closest approach to what we know...EVEN if there ARE gaps and questions.
I personally have a hard time accepting that most of the changes happened thru mutation.
Example: In xxxxxx years humans might have THREE arms, because, for some reason it would turn out that three arms are way better than two.
But for this to happen one person (or a bunch) need to have a mutation (generally explained by comisc particles hitting DNA)..which, all of a sudden would grow for SOME people a third arm/mutation.
This would turn out benefitial....therefore the people with three arms survive better than the others.... and the three-armed ones would slowly overtake the...thus EVOLVED <----- to get the IDEA (basically)
This is VERY hard to accept for me....so.....most of what makes a species now is made by merely random mutations and then selectionof the fittest ?
Wouldnt that take WAY too long ? And what with the "wrong" mutations, th mutations which are actually bad ? We dont have SUCH a long time-frame.
Anyway the other theories - WHICH ONES ?, i dont count religious fables as concurrent theories nor ID)... so i just assume "evolution" as the closest approach to what we know...EVEN if there ARE gaps and questions.
I personally have a hard time accepting that most of the changes happened thru mutation.
Example: In xxxxxx years humans might have THREE arms, because, for some reason it would turn out that three arms are way better than two.
But for this to happen one person (or a bunch) need to have a mutation (generally explained by comisc particles hitting DNA)..which, all of a sudden would grow for SOME people a third arm/mutation.
This would turn out benefitial....therefore the people with three arms survive better than the others.... and the three-armed ones would slowly overtake the...thus EVOLVED <----- to get the IDEA (basically)
This is VERY hard to accept for me....so.....most of what makes a species now is made by merely random mutations and then selectionof the fittest ?
Wouldnt that take WAY too long ? And what with the "wrong" mutations, th mutations which are actually bad ? We dont have SUCH a long time-frame.
Let me quote my teacher:
Quote: I technically do not believe in Evolution. I don't go to Evolution Church every Sunday.
Yes, sounds pretty lame but thats what she said.
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
with emphasis on "created"
i just take my freedom to ADMIRE the biblical stories for their morales and message - but as EXPLANATION for how our world was created....ehrm...no thanks.
And bte..."our world" very well included also 100000000 billion other galaxies/star-systems/planets in those star-systems where we just dont KNOW whether there's life there.
IMHO its a naturak law that certain circumstances ALWAYS lead to organic life/evolution/consciousnes..everywhere in the universe.
(Sorry for being off there a bit)
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Darwin's Black Box is basically a scientific approach to evolution. In the study, and in depth, it basically states what I summerized: there is no proof, not even close, of a transitional creature; and that the thoery of evolution fails to address the problem of how a living organism comes to be from dead ones. Example is the human body is made up of X numer of chemicals that appear in our periodic table. But if you take all those chemicals in a lab, you cant throw them together and make a human. Man has yet to create even a single cell life form out of non-living organisms.
blahblahblahblahevolutionistheonlywayitcouldhavehappenedblahblahblahblahGodcreatedeverythingblahblahblahblahblahyou'restupidblahblahblahblahblahyousuckblahblahblahblah
/thread
Can we move on now? This is boring.
/thread
Can we move on now? This is boring.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Originally posted by: flexy
with emphasis on "created"
i just take my freedom to ADMIRE the biblical stories for their morales and message - but as EXPLANATION for how our world was created....ehrm...no thanks.
And bte..."our world" very well included also 100000000 billion other galaxies/star-systems/planets in those star-systems where we just dont KNOW whether there's life there.
And I completely agree
I'm just saying creationism isnt as wacky as people think. In fact, science is actually proving the thoery of creationism and DISproving evolution.
And I completely agree
Not trying make this religeous, just statting that creationism isnt necesarily a wacky idea. In fact, science is proving it more of a fact than evolution
IMHO its a naturak law that certain circumstances ALWAYS lead to organic life/evolution/consciousnes..everywhere in the universe.
(Sorry for being off there a bit)
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
>>>
Man has yet to create even a single cell life form out of non-living organisms.
>>>
its actually uninteresting whether "man" would ever be able to do this.
the much more interesting question would be....if there are circumstances like this LEFT ALONE....would life evolve ALWAYS and automatically ?
(Eg. early planets, circumstances right.)
THEN it *does* get philosophical....because in essense this would mean that "out of the nothing", throw some ingredients together, life is CREATED..and even more fascinated (as seen here on earth) always towards a consciousnes which is able to reflect on itself.
(Eg.."where are we coming from ? What is the universe ? etc...)
As an analogy.....its like i have certain elements in a computer program....and then i let it run for a certain time...and the elements form/tend towards getting conscious and start asking about their origins and purpose etc....
Man has yet to create even a single cell life form out of non-living organisms.
>>>
its actually uninteresting whether "man" would ever be able to do this.
the much more interesting question would be....if there are circumstances like this LEFT ALONE....would life evolve ALWAYS and automatically ?
(Eg. early planets, circumstances right.)
THEN it *does* get philosophical....because in essense this would mean that "out of the nothing", throw some ingredients together, life is CREATED..and even more fascinated (as seen here on earth) always towards a consciousnes which is able to reflect on itself.
(Eg.."where are we coming from ? What is the universe ? etc...)
As an analogy.....its like i have certain elements in a computer program....and then i let it run for a certain time...and the elements form/tend towards getting conscious and start asking about their origins and purpose etc....
Well, see, i'm pretty unsure about what i believe in.
Truly, i believe there is some kind of greater power. I don't know exactly how to explain it. I don't go to church, nor do I pray, but sometimes i just think to myself things like keeping my family safe. See, i used to pray, about a year ago. I was psyched out believing in the paranormal etc..
See, i still thinkk there's an explanation for everything scientifically, but i lean both ways at the same time.
Truly, i believe there is some kind of greater power. I don't know exactly how to explain it. I don't go to church, nor do I pray, but sometimes i just think to myself things like keeping my family safe. See, i used to pray, about a year ago. I was psyched out believing in the paranormal etc..
See, i still thinkk there's an explanation for everything scientifically, but i lean both ways at the same time.
In Darwin's Black Box theory, as you said, the fact that a "transition" organism can not be found does not change a thing. I'm not sure if i understood you clearly (my English isn't so perfect), but if a species evolutionized to a more adaptive state to its enviorment, won't there be a series of births. Like a gradiance? Piece by piece it becomes stronger.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
Yes, that is true. Except with humans. And if it *is* true with humans, there isnt the least bit of evidence to support it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter