TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Evolution question.....................
Pages (5): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by dcougar99 i happen to think we came from God... not apes

Really? Prove it in another way other than... its in a book written by man.

Here are the recovered bones from a 4 million year old hominid.




Also, if humans were created by god, why are all fossils discovered by anthropologists of apes?

Also, why are we all so genetically similar with all living things, and Im not talking 30-40%... Im talking 80-90%.

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad Really? Prove it in another way other than... its in a book written by man. Here are the recovered bones from a 4 million year old hominid. Also, if humans were created by god, why are all fossils discovered by anthropologists of apes? Also, why are we all so genetically similar with all living things, and Im not talking 30-40%... Im talking 80-90%.

We have 95 - 99,4% same genes as the chimps.

I agree with microevolution(mutation, recombination, natural selection) but macroevolution(changes in body design, species, new phyla) has way too many problems to be considered proven or scientific and is thus still a theory.

quote:

Originally posted by weymouth ...has way too many problems to be considered proven or scientific and is thus still a theory.

There are so many things wrong with that sentence...

quote:

Originally posted by weymouth I agree with microevolution(mutation, recombination, natural selection) but macroevolution(changes in body design, species, new phyla) has way too many problems to be considered proven or scientific and is thus still a theory.

Why do you think others are incapable of seeing those "too many problems"?

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp Theresa is a creationist?????

That's the only bit I paid attention to

It amazes me how popular creationism is in North America, though.

quote:

Originally posted by weymouth I agree with microevolution(mutation, recombination, natural selection) but macroevolution(changes in body design, species, new phyla) has way too many problems to be considered proven or scientific and is thus still a theory.

Different species, you say?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123973.stm

Would this suffice, perhaps?

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa I personally believe the evolution theory is total B.S. However, I will openly admit that I don't know a whole lot about the specifics in regards to this theory.

thats the way! have an opinion about something you know fuck all about. good thinking there. cretin

No, I am not a creationist.

LOL, and why would it be so shocking if I was?

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Different species, you say? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123973.stm Would this suffice, perhaps?

That's what I was talking about earlier. Thanks for link.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN thats the way! have an opinion about something you know fuck all about. good thinking there. cretin

I only believe it is B.S. because I believe something else to be true. Yeesh, I even said I didn't know a lot about the evolution theory, so take your meds and relax little buddy.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa I only believe it is B.S. because I believe something else to be true. Yeesh, I even said I didn't know a lot about the evolution theory, so take your meds and relax little buddy.

if you dont know a lot about something you shouldnt be writing it off without so much as a thought.

haha, youre a creationist and creationists are stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by RandomGirl No, I am not a creationist. LOL, and why would it be so shocking if I was?

pkcRAISTLIN you are clearly the stupid one. I JUST posted this.

Anyway, I have considered the evolution theory, and I personally think it has too many errors to be accurate. But this doesn't mean I don't believe in evolution... just not the theory that we come from apes.

The original question is a question of categorization. You are looking for a defined animal that came before apes, but since we have only categorized animals as we see em now, we dont have a label for them.



and if this is suppose to be a murky point in evolutionary theory, there is the same murky point in any other theory. For example, what came before god?

Until we find another snake that can talk, I'll stick with my belief that Adam and Eve never even existed.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa pkcRAISTLIN you are clearly the stupid one. I JUST posted this.

blah blah. you said you believed in something else actually.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa I only believe it is B.S. because I believe something else to be true

which, by default, normally makes one a creationist. unless theres another side to this equation im unfamiliar with.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa Anyway, I have considered the evolution theory, and I personally think it has too many errors to be accurate. But this doesn't mean I don't believe in evolution... just not the theory that we come from apes.

youve already stated that you dont know anything about it. so how your total lack of understanding can somehow manifest itself sufficiently to find errors in the theory is beyond me. give it up. you dont know what youre talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN blah blah. you said you believed in something else actually. which, by default, normally makes one a creationist. unless theres another side to this equation im unfamiliar with. youve already stated that you dont know anything about it. so how your total lack of understanding can somehow manifest itself sufficiently to find errors in the theory is beyond me. give it up. you dont know what youre talking about.

You are quite the dolt. Take your head out of your ass for a moment and realize that there are more than two ideas in the world as to how things started. Moron.

I did not say I did not know ANYTHING about it, I said that I am not familiar with the specifics in regards to the theory. There may be more to the evolution theory I am unfamiliar with, in which case, there is a possibility that it may actually make sense. From what I understand however, I do not think it adds up quite right.

And once again, I will state, I am not a creationist.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa You are quite the dolt. Take your head out of your ass for a moment and realize that there are more than two ideas in the world as to how things started. Moron. And once again, I will state, I am not a creationist.

ok, please enlighten me. one school argues that all life on earth was created by a deity. the other school says they evolved from early organisms.

could you please elaborate on the other ideas that take the origin of species along a different path?

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa There may be more to the evolution theory I am unfamiliar with

i would be astounded if this were not the case

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Different species, you say? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123973.stm Would this suffice, perhaps?

Lyra I suspect he was actually reffering to this:
http://english.people.com.cn/200607...714_283113.html

But I like your article more...

quote:

The greenish warbler (Phylloscopus trochiloides) lives in a ring-shaped region

quote:

The Himalayan warblers are an example of a rare condition known as a "ring species".

A ring species that lives in a ring region. The Green Bird she's a funny cat!

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa You are quite the dolt.

Wow. I haven't heard the word 'dolt' in forever.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa LOL, and why would it be so shocking if I was?

I know this might sound arrogant at first, and I apologise if it does, but because creationism has no clear basis - and it's quite strange to see an educated person refute all the evidences and follow something that is completely fictional to anyone coming from another culture.

Probably the link with the apes might be strange to you because you either took it too literally, or maybe because you're not very much into Biology. Either way, refuting a theory when you don't know much about it does sound like those conspiracy theorists that see "flaws" where there aren't - and it all happens due to lack of knowledge.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Different species, you say? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1123973.stm Would this suffice, perhaps?

"In their paper, they describe how they played recorded warbler songs to same-species birds that sang in a different way. It was clear to the team that the listening birds did not recognise the "music" and would therefore be unlikely to breed with the warblers that produced it."

Seems like an awfully big leap of faith to base the idea that one specie is becoming two based on that experiment. If they really wanted to test it they would use the sperm of one bird and inseminate it into the bird from the other side. Perhaps thousands of years into the future they will be able to look back at this experiment and say, "that is when we found evidence that one species became two," however I doubt that will happen.

If you did the same experiment with people with different languages you would come to the same result but no one would argue that Russian, American, and Chinese people are becoming different species.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira

Methinks you are the official male manifestation of Ratatoskr!

quote:

Originally posted by weymouth Seems like an awfully big leap of faith to base the idea that one specie is becoming two based on that experiment. If they really wanted to test it they would use the sperm of one bird and inseminate it into the bird from the other side. Perhaps thousands of years into the future they will be able to look back at this experiment and say, "that is when we found evidence that one species became two," however I doubt that will happen.

Why do you doubt, exactly? What if one group went through this:

http://www.physorg.com/news72100592.html
http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story...id=132007GM06W0

quote:

Originally posted by weymouth If you did the same experiment with people with different languages you would come to the same result but no one would argue that Russian, American, and Chinese people are becoming different species.

If we're going to talk about human languages, one has to remember that humans are quite good at learning other languages: bilinguism has not been rare in History, for example, and this is one of the reasons why miscigenation has always played a role both in the Old World (where one could walk from China to Europe, as seen in the Silk Road), and in the New World. I'm an example myself - if I started talking my mother language, ia ser bem confuso

Now, unless there's a study on bilinguism in birds, we can't make this analogy.

quote:

Originally posted by Subey Methinks you are the official male manifestation of Ratatoskr!

Hehe, why?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.