Poll: How did human life come about?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
I need an option for "Human beings have de-evolved over millions of years from advanced forms of life that crashed on this planet from the planet Xzysk."
 

Braznor

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2005
4,619
409
126
I voted for No.2, but would have been happier if there was an option to believe in an extraterrestial origin of life.
 

TheChort

Diamond Member
May 20, 2003
4,203
0
76
Originally posted by: Leros
All three options say that God exists. This is a poorly worded and biased poll.

of course it's up to interpretation, but the way i see it, the 3rd choice leaves god out of the equation, whether he exists or not
 

Leros

Lifer
Jul 11, 2004
21,867
7
81
Originally posted by: TheChort
Originally posted by: Leros
All three options say that God exists. This is a poorly worded and biased poll.

of course it's up to interpretation, but the way i see it, the 3rd choice leaves god out of the equation, whether he exists or not

"Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."

They should have said, "but no god had a part in this process."

god and God are two different words.
 
S

SlitheryDee

I lean towards #3, but technically #2 is equally plausible and would leave the same evidence.

If I choose #3 it would be like saying "This is what happened...cuz I said so and not because there is any real evidence that discredits #2"

Same goes for choosing #2.

Edit: #1 is definitely out BTW.
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: Leros
Originally posted by: TheChort
Originally posted by: Leros
All three options say that God exists. This is a poorly worded and biased poll.

of course it's up to interpretation, but the way i see it, the 3rd choice leaves god out of the equation, whether he exists or not

"Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."

They should have said, "but no god had a part in this process."

god and God are two different words.

Picky, picky, picky.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
Gallup apparently doesn't believe in agnostics.

As an agnostic, I'd choose 4. "I have no way of knowing whether 2 or 3 is correct, but either is possible."
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
I'm going w/ choice 2. What came first, DNA or the proteins?

RNA and small peptides.

But did DNA code for the proteins or the proteins code for the DNA?

Well seeing as nucleic acids are proteins, i would say the proteins coded the DNA first.
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
I'm going w/ choice 2. What came first, DNA or the proteins?

RNA and small peptides.

But did DNA code for the proteins or the proteins code for the DNA?
Proteins never coded for anything imnsho.
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
Originally posted by: Looney
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
I'm going w/ choice 2. What came first, DNA or the proteins?

RNA and small peptides.

But did DNA code for the proteins or the proteins code for the DNA?

Well seeing as nucleic acids are proteins, i would say the proteins coded the DNA first.
No, they aren't.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
God created the base for Humans to evolve from (ie: The lightning bolt into the primordial soup). That base evolved into humans without his aid.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Toastedlightly, if you're trying to argue for a chicken and egg paradox for DNA/Proteins, you should look up the Arch and Scaffold theory. Scientists believe the first selfreplicating nuleic acids were small bits of autocatalytic RNA. Then DNA/proteins came from that and eventually the self replicating RNA fell out.
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Looney
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
I'm going w/ choice 2. What came first, DNA or the proteins?

RNA and small peptides.

But did DNA code for the proteins or the proteins code for the DNA?

Well seeing as nucleic acids are proteins, i would say the proteins coded the DNA first.
No, they aren't.

Damnit! I knew i should have used wikipedia to double check that.
 

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Originally posted by: DrPizza
It really doesn't matter to me if someone chooses choice 2 or choice 3, but anyone choosing choice 1 must be intentionally ignorant.

Troll much? Good job in insulting 84% of the world's populaton. :disgust:

 

DAGTA

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,172
1
0
Where is Tom Cruise to come into this thread, tell everyone they are wrong, and then offer to sell the truth to anyone that wants to buy it?
 

Toastedlightly

Diamond Member
Aug 7, 2004
7,213
6
81
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Toastedlightly, if you're trying to argue for a chicken and egg paradox for DNA/Proteins, you should look up the Arch and Scaffold theory. Scientists believe the first selfreplicating nuleic acids were small bits of autocatalytic RNA. Then DNA/proteins came from that and eventually the self replicating RNA fell out.

Thats the part of my AP Chem/Biochem class I didn't participate in :p Im just being argumentative (slow day today)!
 

Leros

Lifer
Jul 11, 2004
21,867
7
81
Originally posted by: Zolty
You really need a 4th option for atheists.

I think option 3 needs to be replaced with the atheist option. Unless I'm wrong, do people think the universe was created naturally (big bang, etc) and that god exists?
 

DAGTA

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,172
1
0
Those of you complaining about the poll options: did you READ the original post?
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: Zolty
You really need a 4th option for atheists.

Option 3 is fine, unless you're being picky over semantics.