Natural processes aren't random but are following a kind of set laws, blueprint, or order. This order, where did it come from, to become the process (mechanism) of evolution? The natural processes of a living organism to adapt to it's enviroment is a fact, but it's a stretch to say it is the mechanism for (macro) evolution to occur, especially without direct, observable, and repeatable evidence. If evolution is false then anything including evolution in it's belief is false.
@RunColorado100 Debate whom? And honestly, at this point, atheists should no longer feel compelled to "debate" with anyone espousing fairy tales. In fact, they should flatly refuse to do so. It is beneath the dignity of a rational mind to even entertain the notion of an omnipotent, omniscient creator. She may as well corner a five-year-old and "debate" with them the existence of Santa Claus or the tooth fairy.
@oldstock1607 A fool says in his heart there is no God....Why does everyone know the difference between the tooth fairy, Santa Claus and God?...and atheists keep talking the nonsense that they are the same....so much for rational thinking...obviously atheists are a minority around the world...obviously atheists like Dawkins or this lady will not debate other scientists who believe differently...this lady only speaks generalities..science was established by Christians not atheists
@RunColorado100 I'm not really going to give a lengthy response, and for the reason I mentioned above: it is simply beneath my dignity to entertain creationists or their fantasies. However, I should point out that while you are correct about atheists being "a minority around the world," it should also be noted that at one time, people who thought that the earth was round were a minority too. Enjoy your life in benighted ignorance land.
@oldstock1607 God is real deal with it...sooner or later you will...Jesus Christ died in the cross for your and my sins so that we may have eternal life because he loves us all...this is not ignorance...please at least read the Bible from Beginning to end before you make such rash decision...may God bless you and your family..
@RunColorado100 Seriously, I get it. I understand that you have been taught that god exists and that jesus was his son since you were so young, that you never even questioned the veracity of those ideas. And I realize that by this point in your life, to sit down and contemplate the fact that you've believed--truly believed--utter nonsense all your life, is too difficult to face, for it will be an admission that your entire life up to this point is based on a belief in lies. LIBERATE YOURSELF
@oldstock1607 and atheism in Russia killed of more than 50 million people...I have Russian friends....Atheists are just deluded...they think they are rational but are willfully blind..evolution is faith based as is Creation there is no proof that evolution is correct but they keep indoctrinating students who can't think for themselves....There is much proof that the earth is not billions of years...but it does not matter what creationists explain scientifically you are willfully bl
@RunColorado100 did you miss the stories of her and others debating this topic in court and the courts refusing the appeals of creationists because they had no case?
@phessidula Evolution not a Fact ...did you know that these same courts are the ones that said Slavery was legal...lol...the courts do not prove evolution as a fact....it is a religion with trappings of science...I evolution is just a myth and I mean Macro evolution not adaptation ...so please stop being foolish...I do not propose that creationism be taught...or evolution...only science....evolution is not science...
@RunColorado100 what you said about the courts is so stupid...i...i don't even know what to say. can you please explain what the 'trappings' of science are...
Is there any really important purpose to speculating from whence man came???
Let me guess ... It gives a person some sort of security blanket , for without it , we might end up sliting our throats. I say no , there is a predisposed programming within us to Live.
Look Im definately not argueing for Creation/ID , And maybe I am missing her point , or what the actual opposition is from the point of pro Evolution or I guess an Athiestic stand point.
But in my view or oppinion ... if she is trying to be thorough ... Not even mentioning Wallace (especially next to Darwin) is dishonest. And that was the basis of my original comment (my oppinion)
I also feel current curriculum in evolution does need an overhaul.
When so much planning, thought and precision are needed for man to perform such a task, are not the subtlety, exactitude and orderliness observable in the world a proof of origination deriving from the intelligence, creative planning and far-reaching wisdom of the creator?
Like a true Darwin'in , she totally doesnt even mention Alfred Wallace who worked with Darwin ... And might of actually been the brains behind the theory of evolution , who saw intelligent design through the emergence of the human brain capacity.
Alfred Wallace wrote a paper to Darwin which he sent of with his already established principle of natural selection to be peer-reviewed. What has that got to do with Intelligent Design and Creationism/Evolution Controversy? She is not trying to explain or fight a case for Darwin shes exposing Creationism & id for the same religiously based unconstitutional Anti scientific nonsense.
@lxAgnosticxl What do you mean what does it have to do with evolution/ID controversy?
It shows there was controversy between Darwin and Wallace long before the time she mentions. It just didnt have the actual title of ID/ or creationism.
Darwin and Wallace agree'd about most of the theory, except about the emergence of the human intellect ... Wallace theorized predisposed mental faculties in humans , aka Intellegent Design.
I find it dishonest of her to not even mention Wallace.
how is it dishonest , her talk has nothing to do with that. Shes talking about creationist attempts to get it taught in schools. Wallace has nothing to do with this movement
God exists beyond space and time and because of this time and space exists.... Christians are not muslims and we we know that He created us and all things because HE is a personal, creator God who continues to engage with His creation in an intimate and immediate manner. He speaks still to all men today everywhere in His only Begotten Son Jesus., This same Jesus who He raised from the dead will also one day judge the lives of all men in truth and righteousness
creation is a religion and evolution is a religion too, there nothing u can do about it! if u want to know the origins of al living things and the universe u have to beliefe things that can not be proven by sience!
yes it is, creationists believe in the beginning god and evolutionists believe in the beginning dirt or matter. And who knows where that came from... I admit i have a religion but u dont want to admit u have a religion too, cause there a so many things on evolution side that u have to take by faith. But a lot of people dont want to admit it.
@macro343 "yes it is, " No its not you creatard. "creationists believe in the beginning god " Where did that come from? "And who knows where that came from" WOW nice plead from ignorance even tho, the plead from ignorance is shrowed in ignorance as the formation of the universe is explained. Ill make it simple. Prove your god exists, it did it! LOL No creatard will ever justify their baseless belief. Explain why your god gave chhikens inactive DNA for teeth? :) LOL
OK, like i said before i ADMIT i have a faith in a god! i BELIEVE god has no beginning cause time doesnt affect him, he invented it.
Haha, u say the formation of the universe is explained?? where did matter come from? where did the laws come from, like gravity? where did the energie came for the big bang ? what exploded? where did the information came from? where did the universe come from for the matter to expand in?
@gorilla199uncensored u have no evidence for ur evolution neither.. it shows that the gene pool of the chicken’s created kind included the capacity to generate teeth. In other words, the genetic flexibility (variety) existed in the original gene pool to generate daughter populations in which some had teeth, some didn’t.
extinct birds are known from the fossils which did have teeth (while others did not).
an excuse i dont have to defend my religion cause its not tought in schools, u have to defend ur believesystem cause its been tought in schools as science, and is has no backbone..
u know manatee is a mammal, the hip sockets may have another function, it doesnt necessairy say its needed for legs... u make it out of it
I believe in a designer because i dont know what the futher is going to give, i hope for u that u are 100 procent sure evolution happened..
@macro343 wait, your willing to admit that there is a gene pool, that other species are connected to each other, and that fossils are a valid source of info, all of which support the fact of evolution,.. but you don't believe in evolution? your trying to use (bad)evolutionary science to disprove evolution? only a person of faith could wind themselves around so much that they forget which way is up.
@analfetus1 'your willing to admit that there is a gene pool': yes evrybody has one, doesnt prove evolution... it could also be a creator who designed it..
'that other species are connected to each other': yes, for example the dog, wolf and coyote has a common ancestor but ist still a dogkind.. i dont know which people deside that the wolf and dog is another species.. stand 10 m of it, its still a dogkind and they are even capable of reproduction.
@macro343 life, domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus.. where does "kind" fit into that? you can't just change the language of science because you're too ignorant to understand it. I trusted in the fact even when i did believe in a god. The damn pope believes in it. you can't get more faithier than that. what your doing is just stupid. maybe you should troll "The foundational falsehoods of creationism", and maybe give the videos a watch when your fingers get tired.
@analfetus1 animals that are capeble to reproduce whit each other are the same kind thats the best definition i can give. there are probably a few exceptitions and that is a great example to investigate whit sience.
Uihm, i dont give a damn what the pope believes.. i just believe the bible. The pope even kist the koran and stuff, hes just a political pion..
Mabey u have to open your mind and just dont accept evolution because of your livestyle
But a tiger is not a lion, and they both can reproduce with each other, ergo... reproduction can't be the sole criteria of distinction. PLUS over 99% of the life that exists doesn't reproduce sexually.
that's a lot more than a "few exceptions".
All people notice is your inability to explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory, therefore you provide no reason to believe in your religious cretardation.
@transtlantic but a lion and a tiger are both catlike animals, and they are related if they are able to reproduce.. The first catlike animal had the information to produce a variarity of catliked animals. but this is not evolution, this is just variation in a kind of animal. can u explain me when sexual reproduction started? and how did it work?
If evolution is true where did the first seed come from? or the ingredients?
And you are primate like animal, doesn't mean you are a Gorilla. Plus...as i have said, there are plenty of species that don't have sexual reproduction. "the first catlike animal had"...that's magic thinking and totaly opposite to what is physically possible.
Change is always evolution. Change of one distinct species into a novel species, IS evolution. as observed with Plant speciation.
Can you explain Random mutations and natural selection without using evolution theory?
@transtlantic so humans and apes are related, ok if u want solid prove then why dont u mary whit an ape and produce something? if that works then il accept evolution. im magic thinking?? what about u? u believe all organic organism come from a rock where it raind on for millions of years..
@transtlantic because they are brainwashed whit the evolutiontheorie.. my parents are apes and they produced me and thats evolution what a piece of crap is this.. lol.
Well where did all organism comes from? anwer plz?
neutral and negative ones are not the ones evolution needs..
"what a piece of crap is this".... well...the theory of evolution allows to understand how certain genetic disorders appear and allow medical treatments to appear due to that. Breeding is also a very serious knowledge required for modern food production. All of this is, are advantages provided by the theory of evolution.
ALL present organism species come from a parent species by evolutionary mechanisms.
"negatives" is merely relative to the environment, as proven with the malaria.
@transtlantic it has nothing to do whit evolution.. when a dokter is operating someone hes not going to think about evolution.. He just knows the human body. if evolution is true and we come from a bacteria and became better and stronger and smarter.. why arent we becomming better.. But there are coming more and more problems whit the human body because of los of information instead of gaining..
we, humans also have some beneficial mutations. we aren't copies. We are descendants. You are not genetically equal to your parents. you are not a copy. And no...you didn't lose any information. You are just making shit up again.
You are not like a piece of paper. You don't have text printed on you.
What doesn't have anything to do with what we observe are yout examples...
Actually...ALL doctors are thinking about evolution whenever they work. ALL of them.
@transtlantic we have no beneficial mutations.. yes we are copies cause we have the same genes as or parents. if u dont understand my exmple whit the paper scanning and printing then u are the dummiest guy i ever encounterd.. "you don't have text printed on you" what a stupid answer is this, omg ofcours not.. your missing the point and trying to escape from my explanation. no dokter use it.. if he has to do a brainoperation hes not going to think about ancestors, but he just knows the human body
We have many beneficial mutations. Sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria. Knock out Duffy gene in an environment with malaria; PAI-1 mutations, Jaw gradual changes, Muscle hyperthrophy,...
But then again,... over 90% of mutations are harmless - Molecular biology of the cell, 5th edition.
You don't have the same genes as your parents. You have 50% of each. That's why you are different from your parents, and not a clone.
Actually... you stating that you are a "copy" of your parents is making you the one who sounds the dumbest fucker ever...
Do you look exactly like your parents? no you don't. That's because you share 50% of the genetic material of each. Every human has 23 pairs of chromosomes, you receive "half" of that from each parent. Each gene has two alleles, and you receive one from each parent.
Example: ABO system. Mother: A type (AA), Father B type (BB), Children blood type: AB
@transtlantic u still inherit the information of your parents.. Not new outside information is added.. And information is getting lost due to the constant activity of reproduction, the human body is getting worser and worser, if ur parents have a mutation, u whill enherit it too..
"you still inherit ...of your parents", half of it, not all. that's why you are not a clone. actually new information is added ("outside"? that doesn't make any sense), novel polimorphism, for example. Sickle cell disorder, many mutations can appear by sexual reproduction (and they do appear all the time).
"getting lost"? no it isn't. Down syndrome, for example: is when MORE information is added. there is no loss.
"constant activity of reproduction"? that makes no sense.
@transtlantic all information in ur body comes from your parents, u are a copie of the information of ur parents, and u whil give ur information to your kids, New information is added? where does it come from??
More information that already existed, not new information, like a cow that is born whit 5 legs.. is more information but not new..
What "information"? our body is an organism. we don't have "info". We have 50% from each parent. Not all of their genetic material. You SHARE 50% of the genetic material with each parent. HOW many times do I have to repeat this? this is written on ALL biology textbook.
Your kids are "50% you" plus "50% your partner". that's new info. not clones.
"more information", IS, by definition, "new information". A cow born with 5 legs isn't "more info", it's always "new info".
the human body diversity is explained by the theory of evolution. the human body different reaction to different drugs is explained by the theory of evolution. "better"? what's better? for people who live in environments with malaria is to have sickle cell disease. they are stronger, better and healthier than the non mutants.
Bacteria are unicellular organisms, "smart" only applies to organisms with intelligence, you did another logical fallacy.
@transtlantic u didnt answerd any question i asked you, and ur running away from my questioin about the big bang because u know its a fairytale... keep running untill u hit a wall. i have no reason to believe in ur religiuos evolution crap.. go investigate both sides whit equal thoughts and dont preserve the evolution theorie because it fits in your little livestyle..
@transtlantic creation.com/did-plants-evolve a link that plants didnt evolved...
ok, a nobel prize waaauw so it must be true.. because its nobel prize related.. dont try to impres me whit this :s Ok u only believe biologyval evolution? why not talk about cosmis evolution?
i did explained it whit my religion, u didnt whit urse..
LOlol now you giving cretard propaganda websites. waaauw a creation com website! so it must be true! because it's on the internet, right? don't try to impress me with cretard propaganda.
I am always talking about Biological evolution. Evolution of the species IS not cosmological evolution.
You keep trying to use your religion to explain things. ergo the "creation com" crap you just posted.
Yet you keep failing to explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory.
@transtlantic ur telling me propaganda explanations about ur personal faith of evolution, evreything u say happend in your head.. ur making a new fairytale nice going :) so creation websites is propaganda, i say evolution websites are propaganda trying to get rid of god, so that people are the gods.. Like i told creation could mess up ur little lifestyle.. but we will see what the futher is going to be, hope u get converted on day, i will pray for you :)
HOw am i telling "propaganda"? Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition, is used by medical doctors to learn how to cure things, how to understand the observations, how to apply the knowledge. How is that propaganda? "happened in your head"? nope. I actually done Genetic during college and i've mapped the genome of bacteria as they suffered from evolutionary mechanisms. Ask any med student if he didn't observe evolution.
I didn't present any "evolution website". i posted references to scientific textbooks. books that you can read and verify what is written there by direct observations. God is already gone. it's a dead idea, product of magic thinking. nothing to do with science.
Creation doesn't exist. it's just buy bull induced shit.
Can you explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
no? so i have no reason to believe in your religious cretardation.
@transtlantic u know that there are a lot of scientists that dont accept the evolution theorie and say that there had to be a designer for this universe. My opinion is that you have to take both sides whit faith.. And the problem is that u are indoctrinated in your school, u didnt learned anything, the learnt you what you have to believe. The media never mensions the scientists from the creation perpective because the media is corrupt and used by the goverment. U only saw one side :)
I am a biologist. Nearly half of biologist think there is a "designer" but most of them accept evolution (since the two concepts are not contradictory). About 2% of biologists I know are creationists and all that rejected evolution did so out of adherence to biblical literacy, not for scientific reasons. If anything the media and government are more pro-creationism than the scientific community. They make it appear there is a debate within science when there isn't.
@VirologistTim ok, but i think that a lot of scientist also accept evolution because if they say: guys i think that the evidence could prove a designer, they could lose there fundings to do research, that is how hypocrit the goverment is because they need to have the evolutiontheorie so that they can say whel there is no god so we make the rules and we give rights to the people :s Teachers are fired because they mentioned that it is a possible of a designer, its soviet style
The theory of evolution does not state there is no God. We aren't trying to disprove God, we are just trying to figure out how things work. Science doesn't make claims about God's existence or purpose. Even if you propose that God did it, there is still the question of "how". Do you believe God controls the rain? Science understands rainfall. Does that mean God isn't in control? If you believe God can use natural processes to accomplish His will, why couldn't he use evolution?
Francis Collins believes there is a "designer" who used evolution to accomplish his purpose. He thinks DNA is evidence of a designer and calls it "the language of God." He didn't loose his job. He was appointed to be the director of the National Institute of Health. A top science position. Teachers loose their jobs when they refuse to teach what they are hired to teach and when they violate the establishment clause of the constitution that says they cannot promote religion.
@transtlantic mutations are always bad.. can u give me an example of a positive mutation? in evolution a mutation has to be beneficial. They never find a positeve mutation, only negative ones.
Natural selection is just a quality control.. God did this so that an animal kind dont become weak, but that the population keeps strong. natural selection is like checking al new cars and take the bad ones out so only the good ones stays.
a positive mutation? sure: sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria. the humans with the mutation live longer, healthier and reproduce more than the ones without the mutation who die quicker and horribly due to malaria.
Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition
"just quality control"? so...no one dies? "God did"? prove it. where is your god?
animals are the fewest on this planet. try again.
So...still no answer to plant speciation w/out the theory of evo?
@transtlantic thats a wonderfull example.. both sickle cell and malaria are bad... thats like saying cut of your leg so u cant get atleas foot..
The weaker ones die offcours.. cause the stronger ones are dominant. I dont have to prove god cause i admit its a religion, im not saying its science.. u say evolution is science well proof big bang? where did matter come from? where did the energie come from? where did the laws (ex. gravity) come from? how did organic organism started?
You clearl failed to understand the example. Sickle cell disorder is Good in an environment with malaria. Malaria is caused by a living organism, how is it "bad" for that living organism?
People who are born without legs don't get athletes foot, indeed. but that has nothing to do with the example i provided.
"the weaker ones die", you mean - Natural selection as explained by the theory of evolution. you contradict yourself.
@transtlantic malaria is bad for humans dude and sickle cell is also bad for humans.. people who have sickle cell or slightly resistant to malaria.. But both or negative. like my example. cut of your legs (sickle cell) so u never get atleas foot (malaria). understand it.
natural selection produces microevolution not macraevolution. natural selection explains survival of the fittest not origin of the fittest. u think because natural selection is true that evolution is true..
Malaria is bad? not for some humans. Humans with sickle cell disease are protected from malaria. How is it "bad"? they live longer and reproduce more than any other non-mutant human in the same environment.
"but both negative"? do you even read what you write here? you contradict yourself.
Sickle cell isn't the same as malaria. stop being stupid.
Your example is not even similar. it's apples and oranges.
Micro is the exact same as macro. Natural selection is for both.
@transtlantic omg.. if a person has sickle cell he is still sick and dont life very long.. is that postive even if he lives in a area where malaria is? nice positive mutation, u have pain the rest of your live but its positive cause otherwise u could have malaria.. and u live longer so u will have even more pain in your live what a nice positive mutation.. "and both negative" is what i meant, dont be stupid ok :) there not the same, but there both bad. nothing positive..
Everyone is sick with something. And the ones with sickle cell disease live LONGER and healthier than the non-mutants, in areas where malaria is endemic. Ofc that's positive, don't you think living longer and healthier is positive?
Better than dying quickly and painfully with malaria and not even being able to raise a kid, don't you think?
Everything positive.
Your lies are starting to fall pretty quickly. I could have mentioned the knock out Duffy gene mutation, for example.
@transtlantic people whit sickle cell live longer whit pain there hole live and u can do nothing against it.. nice live dude realy positive.. So raising a kid is the ultimate goal of live, produce yourself.. And raising a kid while u have pain ur hole live.. thats so positive for the kid having parents that have pain there entairely live..
Lolol i've been writing Speciation for quite some time now, and you now ask where the novel species come from? lolol proof that you really are clueless about science. HA HA HA HA HA HA
People with sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria live longer with less pain than the non-mutants, their whole lives. And you can do something about it.
Ofc it's positive. the non-mutants die quicker and with more pain.
@transtlantic it had to start from somewhere didnt it? What was in the beginning? answer it me whit science, u cant answer this only when u add some faith in it... answersingenesis /articles/cm/v16/n2/anaemia a good site about sickle cell doesnt prove evolution.
@transtlantic what did the first organism eat? how did it reproduced itself? when did it find a mate?why arent the elements in the stars not shared equial?
the big bang is physics or astronomy. Biology studies life, evolution (biological) is about the evolution of living things. And i don't have to explain the big bang if you ask me about how a car works, don't you agree?
"how did organic organisms started": Well we do knot that our species evolved from a parent species.
I can produce lot's of questions too! look:
How do you explain random mutations without evolution?
How do you explain Natural selection w/out evolution?
@transtlantic theres also cosmic, chemical, planetary evolution... u dont have to explain me how the big bang worked, explane me what exploted and where did it come from? u evolutionist never answers where the information comes from? only how it works..
Actually..natural selection does explain the origin of the fittest. What makes you think it doesn't? I think because you can't explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory, therefore evolution must be true.
don't you agree?
"what exploted"? i don't follow.
Since when do you have to talk about the big bang if someone asks you how a car works?
"information" isn't an individual entity. you are doing a reification fallacy. look it up.
@transtlantic i explained plants, can u explain it whit evolution then? ok try me..
yes what exploded? dont be stupid and answer the simple question, if ur so smart. Where does evrything we have and see come from? (elements,...) and dont say this is not evolution cause it has to do whit evolution..
"parent species come from another species" ok, and where did the other species come from, again another species? ok, where did that coem from?....
You didn't explain Plant speciation. I am smarter than you. "we have, we see come from"? you mean...like a toy? toy factory,. A human being? sexual reproduction. How is talking about the big bang helping me to explain how a car moves? please focus.
I am talking about Biological evolution, which has nothing to do with cosmological evolution. apples and oranges, you stupid brat.
species -> novel species. Evolution proved. don't you agree? or do you have anything to prove otherwise?
@transtlantic ur not answering my questions :s u admit i have a faith but u have an socalled science evolution.. Well, prove it.. u explain me origans of plants. where did sexual reproduction started?
@transtlantic creation.com/did-plants-evolve site that plants didnt evolved..
And down syndrome is a positive mutation? nice going u freak..
"Origin of the plants? speciation from a non-plant species." Hahaha so funny keeping avoiding the question.. Cause u know that if we go far enough in time u have to belive it came from rocks where it rained for millions of year on it.. all answers that required believe, not science kid..
look... Plant speciation is FACT. you can't deny it.
What is a "positive mutation" for you? because, according to the KNOWN definition: Sickle cell disease IS A positive mutation in an environment with malaria. And where is it in the definition of evolution that you "must" have positive mutations? where?
Where am i avoiding your questions? i am answering. "it came from rocks"? who says that? where is that written? you are confusing Abiogenesis with Evolution. 2 different things.
@transtlantic ramdom mutations are all neutral or negative.. It has nothing to do whit evolution but whit the second law of thermodynamics. Evrything degrades over time.. your body degrades, buildings degrades,... We humans have some neutral of negative mutations because we are a copie of a copie of a copie of a copie of the first human.. so we lose information.. LIke when u scan a piece of paper whit text on it print it, scan it, print it,... do that 1000 times, and tell me if u can still read
Random mutations are mostly neutral, and less than 10% either beneficial or non-beneficial. Molecular biology of the cell, 5th edition. Sorry...but your magic thinking does not substitute the fact that science keeps proving your claims wrong. The laws of thermodynamics, it's physics, not biology. you tards should really try pick a science book...
"everything degrades"? where does it say that? in what book?
@transtlantic indeed the body grows beacuse we eat food and or body is designed to use that energy in order to grow. but even if we still keep taking food (energy) ultimately we will still die because where getting old and worser (degrading)
u only can use energy if u have something that can utilise the energy...
"buildings are built" if a building is made it whil degrade and people whil try to maintain the building, but even when they do it whil ultimately fall down over time.
Our body grows because of a genotype that expresses a phenotype. ALL of this because of evolution. "we metabolize"? we don't breathe oxygen, some organisms, breathe iron other sulphur. Why? How? oh right: evolution again. Actually we grow old due to Senescence. That's not "degrading": it's part of life.
"use"..."utilize", they are both synonyms. Everything is energy.
"people will try to mantain". wrong: energy will be invested - us working. energy put into a system to build.
@transtlantic again u ar talking about how a human body works, we can see it and its a fact but then ur believe is creeping in you telling this is all because of evolutioooon... Origings isnt answerable bij science but u need to have a faith if u want answers on origins of humans, plants, space, matter, time exc.. people get old and become weaker..
a rock is energy?
again that means people while try to maintain buildings otherwise they whil fall faster..
@transtlantic "A rock is matter, and matter is a form of energy." some matter is energy and u can use it, but a rock isnt energy lol, dont make a delusion.
A rock can be turned into energy. How do you think Nuclear Power plants work?
You clearly are retarded, you dumb kid.
"it had to start somewhere"? sure. Rain is water that comes from clouds. but why would we have to mention the ocean in order to explain how rain falls down to the earth? we don't need to.
"what was the beginning"? of our species? from the parent species - Homo erectus.
"good site"?
Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition - evolution proven.
@transtlantic Once more the evidence of the real world is seen to be consistent with the truth of Genesis; plants reproduce “according to their kind”. That is, gingkos have consistently produced gingkos, pines have consistently produced pines, and magnolias have consistently produced magnolias ever since the Creator spoke them into existence to reproduce “after their kind”.
"the first,..." the point here is to SHOW that evolution happens today. You can't deny it.
Once more the evidence of the real world proves the genesis christian fiction story is false. "plant" isn't the name of any species. It's species that change. A rose isn't a tree. A plant originating a novel species didn't reproduce according to kind, it produced a new kind.
"gingkos", etc have many species. and they all originated new species or share a common ancestor.
what do you call the theory that explains how a distinct population of a species of magnolias originate a novel species of magnolias by means of random mutations and natural selection?
I don't follow...how is the FACT that the Homo erectus originated ALL modern human beings..."reproducing after their kind"?
You really are fucking retarded and you keep failing to explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory.
@transtlantic U mean microevolution and thats a fact, but like i said it just means variations, u see a tiger and a lion = microevolution (fatc) but then u ultimately wanne say that evreything is related over time = macroevolution (believe)
@analfetus1 'and that fossils are a valid source of info': When i see fossils, i conclued: hmm that thing whatever it was is dead.. Fossils arent big prove for evolution cause u cant use that as evidence.. im a person of faith.. what about u
@gorilla199uncensored The same sort of variety exists in both living and extinct reptiles—some with teeth, some without. Some humans have teeth some dont....
And u say i have a baselies belief, what about u? urs even worse..
"some with teeth, some without. Some humans have teeth some dont...."
LOL NO chickens are different its some lose their teeths.
ITS THEY DONT HAVE TEETH BUT SOMTIMES THE ODD ONE IS BORN WITH TEETH.
EXPLAIN WHY THEY INACTIVE DNA FOR TEETH!
Your belief is baseless thats what religion is defined as, thats why you require FAITH, science Evolution doesnt require any baseless beleif EG faith. The evidence is there for all to see.
@gorilla199uncensored it shows that the gene pool of the chicken’s created kind included the capacity to generate teeth. In other words, the genetic flexibility (variety) existed in the original gene pool to generate daughter populations in which some had teeth, some didn’t.
extinct birds are known from the fossils which did have teeth (while others did not).
what evicence? tell me i really wanne hear ur best evidence u have? give me the best u have for ur *science* evolution...
@macro343 "what evicence? " LOL well for starters why has there never been one EVEN ONE FOSSIL found of an animal before it evolved? LOL BTW if you want to deny atomic dating, then dont claim atomic power, bombs or medicine exist! If atomic dating is wrong, then cant exist! Even better these days they send 3-4 samples to different labs (blind testing) GUESS WHAT? IT proves the dating works! So why do you have a baseless belif? YOU KNOW MOST XTIANS ACCEPT EVOLUTION!
Christians like to PRETEND there is a 'controversy' within the Scientific community but there isn't one at all. There's evolution which is a factual basis for all life on the planet and then there is Creationism/ID which doesn't even enter the Scientific arena and is 100% Science FICTION.
Believers often forget that God, the Bible, and Jesus are all 100% MAN-MADE inventions. It was Man who made GOD, not the other way around.
Instead of being 'Born-Again' why don't you guys just GROW THE FUCK UP?
To all creationists - Since god exists "outside of space and time" stop wasting space and time trying to convince people that god created everything inside space and time. Just believe it if you want to and STFU.
Hey, kiddos, want to see a fairy tale that adults really believe? Google whale evolution and go watch a 7 minutes video on the PBS web site that shows how an ancient 200 pound wolf searched for food along the beach, wander out into the surf, and morphed (evolved) into a 100 ton whale. There is nothing scientific about it, but nonetheless, this is the fairy tale that some adults really believe! Especially comical are the nostrils migrating to the top of the head to become a blow hole!
you can't PROVE that god dosnt exist but you can find enough evidence in the origins of religion and the mind, its contridictions with well established evidence based science, and tons of evidence based science itself to KNOW BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that god dosnt exist. you cant PROVE philosophical materialism right but you can be sure BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. evolution has enough evidence to be beyond unreasonable doubt
What's the chance that cdesignproponists will develop their own vaccines, not using science and an understanding of evolutionary biology, but using pure Godly magic? What puzzles me is that so many creationists still get a flu shot. How do those theotards think flu vaccines are created? If you're a creationist, why even go to the doctor, why not save your money, and just pray to God for a magical recovery? I'll tell you why - because you know you're full of shit!
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T CREATE. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. It only operates once there is life and reproduction and not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. Natural selection is a passive process, not a creative process. The real issue is not natural selection but what biological variations are possible in nature. Read my Internet article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
DAWKINS' BLIND WATCHMAKER IS NO ARGUMENT. DNA sequence isn't like a watch. And, even if the parts of a watch come together by chance, that doesn't mean the parts could be produced by chance. An incomplete watch can last a long time until its human DESIGNER completes it. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read my Internet article HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
There is no controversy. Evolution has been proven time and again. It's beyond all reasonable doubt. Creationism and ID are not science. End of story..... or at least it should be. /sigh
its funny this is still referred to as a "controversy"....because anyone with any significant measure of intelligence and rationality knows well enough that creationism is entirely and completely undeserving of serious consideration as an explanation for reality.....
the way i see it the debate is simply this: did consciousness develop out of physical reality; or was physical reality created by consciousness?
We don't know enough about either consciousness or 'reality' to say definitively which is true, but I think Mark Twain said it best:
"It is all a Dream, a grotesque and foolish dream. Nothing exists but you. And You are but a Thought — a vagrant Thought, a useless Thought, a homeless Thought, wandering forlorn among the empty eternities"
We know much about consciousness. Look into neural networks. I myself have programmed artificial neural networks. They can take inputs from stimuli, give outputs, and learn. All within a computer.
@proatheism what you're describing is the physical mechanisms of the brain, that's not consciousness. for example, when your brain creates a dream, your consciousness is localized within that dream. So even though you are surrounded by your brain's creation, your mind, your 'self', is seperate and distinct from that creation.
a computer could theoretically do the same thing, create a universe within itself, and then create living systems within that universe that possessed a distinctive mind
Its more than the physical mechanisms of the brain. It's a replica of the internal workings. We know that the neuron uses summation gates of all the inputs of the dendrites to calculate an action potential. If that action potential reaches a critical mass it gives signals to the neurons connected to its axon based on a weight system. Inputs and outputs are merely neurons that go to the body. Every piece can and has been replicated.
@proatheism where is the subject? what is the subject? i.e. "who" is observing these 'inputs and outputs'?
decision-making has a physical process (that is what you're describing); evolution/change has a physical process; continuity/memory has a physical process: but *where* is the physical process describing subjectivity? *what* is the physical process for subjectivity? *how* does this physical process work? and *why* does subjectivity even exist in the first place?
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weeb¬ly.com
It's a scary world as the allopathic medical dictatorship confounds gender with blood-intoxicating hormones and mutilates, through surgery, the genitalia of retardates in order to make barren, pseudo-women of homosexual men.
["This is the scientific reality that the seeds of all common fruits (except citrus) contain vitamin B17, an anti-cancer vitamin. If we ingest proper quantities of these vitamins, either in the pure form or through ingesting the nitrilosidic foods, we will be able to prevent cancer just as surely as we are able to prevent scurvy by the use of vitamin C or pernicious anemia by the use of vitamin B12." — Ernest Krebs, Jr.]
“All things weird are normal in this whore of cities.” — Eddie Constantine as secret agent 003 Lemmy Caution in Jean-Luc Godard's 1965 film “Alphaville”
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
That's the answer. We postulate to fill in the blanks of what our meager senses are incapable of registering. Science is knowledge as perceived by humans. How could it be anything else?
@GuillemotWatcher : Evolutionary Corporator Eugenia Scott is a lady in the same vein that the public facility with toilets for women sports the plastic placard: LADIES.
@FinallyTheNight I don't have to take seriously someone who would write this. From your channel - "The extraterrestrial alien influence should be acknowledged in any discussions concerning morality. The U.S. government is actively trading children for technology. The electronic/computerized marvels of the age, beginning after the unprecedented carnage of W.W.II, are not the products of human ingenuity, but humanoid ingenuity."
@FinallyTheNight You may need counselling. You have multiple channels & you're friends with yourself.
Now I talking to ScientificalnessUSA (another one of your channels), conjecture is important. Beliefs are perpetuated, critical thinking advances.
Hello FinallyTheNight, You, (& I include your other identities) may know the language but in striving to come across as intellectual you come across real intellects. I'm one of them & I'll be watching for you in what ever guise you present yourself.
@FinallyTheNight "theoretic n, pl theoretics : the speculative part of an art or science : THEORY"
Yes, principally that's what science is, to speculate & develop theories that best explain phenomena. But the lexicon of science is very specific. Accepted theories must be supported by evidence & be peer reviewed. The theory of evolution, based on Darwin's work, could have been blown apart by the discipline of genetics, but it massively supports natural evolution.
@FinallyTheNight We think deeply about such different things. It's been slightly surreal to have had contact with you. There is no way I can wish you anything but a long and happy life.
Natural processes aren't random but are following a kind of set laws, blueprint, or order. This order, where did it come from, to become the process (mechanism) of evolution? The natural processes of a living organism to adapt to it's enviroment is a fact, but it's a stretch to say it is the mechanism for (macro) evolution to occur, especially without direct, observable, and repeatable evidence. If evolution is false then anything including evolution in it's belief is false.
vbirdieb 5 days ago
there's really no "controversy." Evolution is a fact, "intelligent design" is utter nonsense.
oldstock1607 3 weeks ago 2
@oldstock1607 Evolution a fact..lol..why doesn't she debate someone ...she talks and talks and says nothing...
RunColorado100 3 weeks ago
@RunColorado100 Debate whom? And honestly, at this point, atheists should no longer feel compelled to "debate" with anyone espousing fairy tales. In fact, they should flatly refuse to do so. It is beneath the dignity of a rational mind to even entertain the notion of an omnipotent, omniscient creator. She may as well corner a five-year-old and "debate" with them the existence of Santa Claus or the tooth fairy.
oldstock1607 3 weeks ago
@oldstock1607 A fool says in his heart there is no God....Why does everyone know the difference between the tooth fairy, Santa Claus and God?...and atheists keep talking the nonsense that they are the same....so much for rational thinking...obviously atheists are a minority around the world...obviously atheists like Dawkins or this lady will not debate other scientists who believe differently...this lady only speaks generalities..science was established by Christians not atheists
RunColorado100 2 weeks ago
@RunColorado100 I'm not really going to give a lengthy response, and for the reason I mentioned above: it is simply beneath my dignity to entertain creationists or their fantasies. However, I should point out that while you are correct about atheists being "a minority around the world," it should also be noted that at one time, people who thought that the earth was round were a minority too. Enjoy your life in benighted ignorance land.
oldstock1607 2 weeks ago
@oldstock1607 God is real deal with it...sooner or later you will...Jesus Christ died in the cross for your and my sins so that we may have eternal life because he loves us all...this is not ignorance...please at least read the Bible from Beginning to end before you make such rash decision...may God bless you and your family..
RunColorado100 2 weeks ago
@RunColorado100 Seriously, I get it. I understand that you have been taught that god exists and that jesus was his son since you were so young, that you never even questioned the veracity of those ideas. And I realize that by this point in your life, to sit down and contemplate the fact that you've believed--truly believed--utter nonsense all your life, is too difficult to face, for it will be an admission that your entire life up to this point is based on a belief in lies. LIBERATE YOURSELF
oldstock1607 2 weeks ago
@oldstock1607 and atheism in Russia killed of more than 50 million people...I have Russian friends....Atheists are just deluded...they think they are rational but are willfully blind..evolution is faith based as is Creation there is no proof that evolution is correct but they keep indoctrinating students who can't think for themselves....There is much proof that the earth is not billions of years...but it does not matter what creationists explain scientifically you are willfully bl
RunColorado100 2 weeks ago
@RunColorado100 did you miss the stories of her and others debating this topic in court and the courts refusing the appeals of creationists because they had no case?
evolution is a fact.
phessidula 1 week ago
@phessidula Evolution not a Fact ...did you know that these same courts are the ones that said Slavery was legal...lol...the courts do not prove evolution as a fact....it is a religion with trappings of science...I evolution is just a myth and I mean Macro evolution not adaptation ...so please stop being foolish...I do not propose that creationism be taught...or evolution...only science....evolution is not science...
RunColorado100 1 week ago
@RunColorado100 what you said about the courts is so stupid...i...i don't even know what to say. can you please explain what the 'trappings' of science are...
phessidula 1 week ago
Oh by the way .... let me ask yall
Is there any really important purpose to speculating from whence man came???
Let me guess ... It gives a person some sort of security blanket , for without it , we might end up sliting our throats. I say no , there is a predisposed programming within us to Live.
Mk101T 1 month ago
Look Im definately not argueing for Creation/ID , And maybe I am missing her point , or what the actual opposition is from the point of pro Evolution or I guess an Athiestic stand point.
But in my view or oppinion ... if she is trying to be thorough ... Not even mentioning Wallace (especially next to Darwin) is dishonest. And that was the basis of my original comment (my oppinion)
I also feel current curriculum in evolution does need an overhaul.
Mk101T 1 month ago
Is féidir le duine ar bith a cheapann go hoibiachtúil gan chlaonadh i ndáiríre?
Ciallaionnseseoco 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The atheist Delusion!
When so much planning, thought and precision are needed for man to perform such a task, are not the subtlety, exactitude and orderliness observable in the world a proof of origination deriving from the intelligence, creative planning and far-reaching wisdom of the creator?
1tabligh 1 month ago
well, if anyone bumps into the designer, tell him(?) that I said thanks for inventing smallpox. good stuff.
untestableClaims 1 month ago
Like a true Darwin'in , she totally doesnt even mention Alfred Wallace who worked with Darwin ... And might of actually been the brains behind the theory of evolution , who saw intelligent design through the emergence of the human brain capacity.
Mk101T 2 months ago
@Mk101T
Alfred Wallace wrote a paper to Darwin which he sent of with his already established principle of natural selection to be peer-reviewed. What has that got to do with Intelligent Design and Creationism/Evolution Controversy? She is not trying to explain or fight a case for Darwin shes exposing Creationism & id for the same religiously based unconstitutional Anti scientific nonsense.
lxAgnosticxl 1 month ago in playlist Science / Evolution / ID
@lxAgnosticxl What do you mean what does it have to do with evolution/ID controversy?
It shows there was controversy between Darwin and Wallace long before the time she mentions. It just didnt have the actual title of ID/ or creationism.
Darwin and Wallace agree'd about most of the theory, except about the emergence of the human intellect ... Wallace theorized predisposed mental faculties in humans , aka Intellegent Design.
I find it dishonest of her to not even mention Wallace.
Mk101T 1 month ago
@Mk101T
how is it dishonest , her talk has nothing to do with that. Shes talking about creationist attempts to get it taught in schools. Wallace has nothing to do with this movement
lxAgnosticxl 1 month ago
God exists beyond space and time and because of this time and space exists.... Christians are not muslims and we we know that He created us and all things because HE is a personal, creator God who continues to engage with His creation in an intimate and immediate manner. He speaks still to all men today everywhere in His only Begotten Son Jesus., This same Jesus who He raised from the dead will also one day judge the lives of all men in truth and righteousness
shieldsff 2 months ago
@shieldsff
Wow...so God is like a....a fairy.
Jesus? you mean the zombie guy? come on...
transtlantic 2 months ago
creation is a religion and evolution is a religion too, there nothing u can do about it! if u want to know the origins of al living things and the universe u have to beliefe things that can not be proven by sience!
macro343 3 months ago
@macro343 Evolution is not a religion. Try again.
BerzergerR 3 months ago
@macro343
"creation is a religion and evolution is a religion too"
How dare you!
Evolution is not a religion.
Its interesting tho your comment proves 2 things.
1) You know evolution is far greater than a religion as you insult it by down grading it to religion
2) You know religion is bullshit as you use ity as insult!
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored
yes it is, creationists believe in the beginning god and evolutionists believe in the beginning dirt or matter. And who knows where that came from... I admit i have a religion but u dont want to admit u have a religion too, cause there a so many things on evolution side that u have to take by faith. But a lot of people dont want to admit it.
macro343 3 months ago
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored
OK, like i said before i ADMIT i have a faith in a god! i BELIEVE god has no beginning cause time doesnt affect him, he invented it.
Haha, u say the formation of the universe is explained?? where did matter come from? where did the laws come from, like gravity? where did the energie came for the big bang ? what exploded? where did the information came from? where did the universe come from for the matter to expand in?
and u wil answer al these questions whit ur faith
macro343 3 months ago
@macro343
"i ADMIT i have a faith in a god! "
So you have a baseles belief in a magic thing, that you attribute features too for no reason other than nothing.
" where did "
Read if you wnat to educate yourself (LOL offcourse you dont want to educate yourself as god pretending requires ignorance)
So you will admit the bible is wrong on many things? :)
Even if we pretend man kind is ignorant, doesnt mean you get to beg the question and supply your imaginary god as the answer!
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@macro343
Just begging the question for your baseles belief. You have no evidence for your god :(
Funny how your god requires people to believe FOR NO REASON! and only rewards or punishes after death just like every god! LOL
Explain why your god gave chikens inactive DNA for teeth? :) LOL
Hey give me all your money and I guarentee you will get into heaven :)
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored u have no evidence for ur evolution neither.. it shows that the gene pool of the chicken’s created kind included the capacity to generate teeth. In other words, the genetic flexibility (variety) existed in the original gene pool to generate daughter populations in which some had teeth, some didn’t.
extinct birds are known from the fossils which did have teeth (while others did not).
macro343 3 months ago
@macro343
"u have no evidence for ur evolution neither"
LOL you made up a stupid excuse.
Theres NO gene pool of chikenbs that do have teeth!
THEY ALL HAVE INACTIVE DNA FOR TEETH!
Ill ask you a simpel question.
Why do manatees have hip sockets for legs, BUT NO LEGS? LOL
Why do you believe in a religion when you have no reason too?
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored
an excuse i dont have to defend my religion cause its not tought in schools, u have to defend ur believesystem cause its been tought in schools as science, and is has no backbone..
u know manatee is a mammal, the hip sockets may have another function, it doesnt necessairy say its needed for legs... u make it out of it
I believe in a designer because i dont know what the futher is going to give, i hope for u that u are 100 procent sure evolution happened..
macro343 3 months ago
@macro343
" i dont have to defend my religion "
See you know you cant.
So why do you have a baselees belief thats pretty stupid isnt it?
"u know manatee is a mammal, the hip sockets may have another function, it doesnt necessairy say its needed for legs... "
Well nobody has found any other use for them!
OH CARE TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE TENDONS THAT ARE MENT TO ATTACH TO THE LEGS USED FOR?
SINCE THEY ARNT ATTACHED ON ONE END! LOL
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@macro343
"I believe in a designer because i dont know what the futher is going to give"
WOW begging the question, now a false dicotomy and Pascals wager in ONE!
Its the jesus brand you have a baseless belief in right?
So what will future give, SINCE YOU HAVE PICKED A FALSE GOD?
What will the real one, Say one of the 10,000s that existed before yours even had its first failed attempt at religion?
How wile they judge a follower of the vile god of the bible?
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@macro343 wait, your willing to admit that there is a gene pool, that other species are connected to each other, and that fossils are a valid source of info, all of which support the fact of evolution,.. but you don't believe in evolution? your trying to use (bad)evolutionary science to disprove evolution? only a person of faith could wind themselves around so much that they forget which way is up.
analfetus1 3 months ago
@analfetus1 'your willing to admit that there is a gene pool': yes evrybody has one, doesnt prove evolution... it could also be a creator who designed it..
'that other species are connected to each other': yes, for example the dog, wolf and coyote has a common ancestor but ist still a dogkind.. i dont know which people deside that the wolf and dog is another species.. stand 10 m of it, its still a dogkind and they are even capable of reproduction.
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343 life, domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus.. where does "kind" fit into that? you can't just change the language of science because you're too ignorant to understand it. I trusted in the fact even when i did believe in a god. The damn pope believes in it. you can't get more faithier than that. what your doing is just stupid. maybe you should troll "The foundational falsehoods of creationism", and maybe give the videos a watch when your fingers get tired.
analfetus1 2 months ago
@analfetus1 animals that are capeble to reproduce whit each other are the same kind thats the best definition i can give. there are probably a few exceptitions and that is a great example to investigate whit sience.
Uihm, i dont give a damn what the pope believes.. i just believe the bible. The pope even kist the koran and stuff, hes just a political pion..
Mabey u have to open your mind and just dont accept evolution because of your livestyle
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
But a tiger is not a lion, and they both can reproduce with each other, ergo... reproduction can't be the sole criteria of distinction. PLUS over 99% of the life that exists doesn't reproduce sexually.
that's a lot more than a "few exceptions".
All people notice is your inability to explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory, therefore you provide no reason to believe in your religious cretardation.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic but a lion and a tiger are both catlike animals, and they are related if they are able to reproduce.. The first catlike animal had the information to produce a variarity of catliked animals. but this is not evolution, this is just variation in a kind of animal. can u explain me when sexual reproduction started? and how did it work?
If evolution is true where did the first seed come from? or the ingredients?
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
And you are primate like animal, doesn't mean you are a Gorilla. Plus...as i have said, there are plenty of species that don't have sexual reproduction. "the first catlike animal had"...that's magic thinking and totaly opposite to what is physically possible.
Change is always evolution. Change of one distinct species into a novel species, IS evolution. as observed with Plant speciation.
Can you explain Random mutations and natural selection without using evolution theory?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic so humans and apes are related, ok if u want solid prove then why dont u mary whit an ape and produce something? if that works then il accept evolution. im magic thinking?? what about u? u believe all organic organism come from a rock where it raind on for millions of years..
macro343 2 months ago
Comment removed
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Humans are apes, Great apes to be more specific. Pick an encyclopedia or a dictionary.
Your parents are apes. they produced you. You already have to accept evolution, all you just do is denial.
Ofc you are producing magic thinking - God did it. that's not science, that's religious nonsense.
"come from a rock"? where is that written?
Actually...over 90% mutations are neutral - molecular biology of the cell, 5th edition, very few are bad.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic because they are brainwashed whit the evolutiontheorie.. my parents are apes and they produced me and thats evolution what a piece of crap is this.. lol.
Well where did all organism comes from? anwer plz?
neutral and negative ones are not the ones evolution needs..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
"what a piece of crap is this".... well...the theory of evolution allows to understand how certain genetic disorders appear and allow medical treatments to appear due to that. Breeding is also a very serious knowledge required for modern food production. All of this is, are advantages provided by the theory of evolution.
ALL present organism species come from a parent species by evolutionary mechanisms.
"negatives" is merely relative to the environment, as proven with the malaria.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic it has nothing to do whit evolution.. when a dokter is operating someone hes not going to think about evolution.. He just knows the human body. if evolution is true and we come from a bacteria and became better and stronger and smarter.. why arent we becomming better.. But there are coming more and more problems whit the human body because of los of information instead of gaining..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
we, humans also have some beneficial mutations. we aren't copies. We are descendants. You are not genetically equal to your parents. you are not a copy. And no...you didn't lose any information. You are just making shit up again.
You are not like a piece of paper. You don't have text printed on you.
What doesn't have anything to do with what we observe are yout examples...
Actually...ALL doctors are thinking about evolution whenever they work. ALL of them.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic we have no beneficial mutations.. yes we are copies cause we have the same genes as or parents. if u dont understand my exmple whit the paper scanning and printing then u are the dummiest guy i ever encounterd.. "you don't have text printed on you" what a stupid answer is this, omg ofcours not.. your missing the point and trying to escape from my explanation. no dokter use it.. if he has to do a brainoperation hes not going to think about ancestors, but he just knows the human body
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
We have many beneficial mutations. Sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria. Knock out Duffy gene in an environment with malaria; PAI-1 mutations, Jaw gradual changes, Muscle hyperthrophy,...
But then again,... over 90% of mutations are harmless - Molecular biology of the cell, 5th edition.
You don't have the same genes as your parents. You have 50% of each. That's why you are different from your parents, and not a clone.
I know that your examples are false.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@macro343
Actually... you stating that you are a "copy" of your parents is making you the one who sounds the dumbest fucker ever...
Do you look exactly like your parents? no you don't. That's because you share 50% of the genetic material of each. Every human has 23 pairs of chromosomes, you receive "half" of that from each parent. Each gene has two alleles, and you receive one from each parent.
Example: ABO system. Mother: A type (AA), Father B type (BB), Children blood type: AB
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic u still inherit the information of your parents.. Not new outside information is added.. And information is getting lost due to the constant activity of reproduction, the human body is getting worser and worser, if ur parents have a mutation, u whill enherit it too..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
"you still inherit ...of your parents", half of it, not all. that's why you are not a clone. actually new information is added ("outside"? that doesn't make any sense), novel polimorphism, for example. Sickle cell disorder, many mutations can appear by sexual reproduction (and they do appear all the time).
"getting lost"? no it isn't. Down syndrome, for example: is when MORE information is added. there is no loss.
"constant activity of reproduction"? that makes no sense.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic all information in ur body comes from your parents, u are a copie of the information of ur parents, and u whil give ur information to your kids, New information is added? where does it come from??
More information that already existed, not new information, like a cow that is born whit 5 legs.. is more information but not new..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
What "information"? our body is an organism. we don't have "info". We have 50% from each parent. Not all of their genetic material. You SHARE 50% of the genetic material with each parent. HOW many times do I have to repeat this? this is written on ALL biology textbook.
Your kids are "50% you" plus "50% your partner". that's new info. not clones.
"more information", IS, by definition, "new information". A cow born with 5 legs isn't "more info", it's always "new info".
transtlantic 2 months ago
@macro343
the human body diversity is explained by the theory of evolution. the human body different reaction to different drugs is explained by the theory of evolution. "better"? what's better? for people who live in environments with malaria is to have sickle cell disease. they are stronger, better and healthier than the non mutants.
Bacteria are unicellular organisms, "smart" only applies to organisms with intelligence, you did another logical fallacy.
You are JUST retarded.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic human body is explained by evolution? ok tell me what evolution did whit the explanation of the human body.
you are brainwashed and dont want to see the truth because it could infect ur beautifull livestyle..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
you are a typical cretard...you try to digress every time I expose how much you ignore....
I asked you one simple question: CAn you explain Plant speciation without using evo theory?
if you can't... i have no reason to believe in your religious crap.
Go read about the Dover trial and stop bothering educated people.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic u didnt answerd any question i asked you, and ur running away from my questioin about the big bang because u know its a fairytale... keep running untill u hit a wall. i have no reason to believe in ur religiuos evolution crap.. go investigate both sides whit equal thoughts and dont preserve the evolution theorie because it fits in your little livestyle..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Why would i keep answering multiple questions? Quid pro quo. I answer some of yours, you answer some of mine. Mine remains unanswered. tsk tsk...
How am i running away? I just asked one simple question:
How do you explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory?
The big bang is quite factual. 2 Nobel prize related to that. And talking about the big bang is astronomy, not biology. focus.
How don't you have a reason? have you explained Plant speciation with your religious crap?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic creation.com/did-plants-evolve a link that plants didnt evolved...
ok, a nobel prize waaauw so it must be true.. because its nobel prize related.. dont try to impres me whit this :s Ok u only believe biologyval evolution? why not talk about cosmis evolution?
i did explained it whit my religion, u didnt whit urse..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
LOlol now you giving cretard propaganda websites. waaauw a creation com website! so it must be true! because it's on the internet, right? don't try to impress me with cretard propaganda.
I am always talking about Biological evolution. Evolution of the species IS not cosmological evolution.
You keep trying to use your religion to explain things. ergo the "creation com" crap you just posted.
Yet you keep failing to explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic ur telling me propaganda explanations about ur personal faith of evolution, evreything u say happend in your head.. ur making a new fairytale nice going :) so creation websites is propaganda, i say evolution websites are propaganda trying to get rid of god, so that people are the gods.. Like i told creation could mess up ur little lifestyle.. but we will see what the futher is going to be, hope u get converted on day, i will pray for you :)
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
HOw am i telling "propaganda"? Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition, is used by medical doctors to learn how to cure things, how to understand the observations, how to apply the knowledge. How is that propaganda? "happened in your head"? nope. I actually done Genetic during college and i've mapped the genome of bacteria as they suffered from evolutionary mechanisms. Ask any med student if he didn't observe evolution.
ofc creation websites is propaganda.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@macro343
I didn't present any "evolution website". i posted references to scientific textbooks. books that you can read and verify what is written there by direct observations. God is already gone. it's a dead idea, product of magic thinking. nothing to do with science.
Creation doesn't exist. it's just buy bull induced shit.
Can you explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory?
no? so i have no reason to believe in your religious cretardation.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic u know that there are a lot of scientists that dont accept the evolution theorie and say that there had to be a designer for this universe. My opinion is that you have to take both sides whit faith.. And the problem is that u are indoctrinated in your school, u didnt learned anything, the learnt you what you have to believe. The media never mensions the scientists from the creation perpective because the media is corrupt and used by the goverment. U only saw one side :)
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
I am a biologist. Nearly half of biologist think there is a "designer" but most of them accept evolution (since the two concepts are not contradictory). About 2% of biologists I know are creationists and all that rejected evolution did so out of adherence to biblical literacy, not for scientific reasons. If anything the media and government are more pro-creationism than the scientific community. They make it appear there is a debate within science when there isn't.
VirologistTim 2 months ago
@VirologistTim ok, but i think that a lot of scientist also accept evolution because if they say: guys i think that the evidence could prove a designer, they could lose there fundings to do research, that is how hypocrit the goverment is because they need to have the evolutiontheorie so that they can say whel there is no god so we make the rules and we give rights to the people :s Teachers are fired because they mentioned that it is a possible of a designer, its soviet style
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
The theory of evolution does not state there is no God. We aren't trying to disprove God, we are just trying to figure out how things work. Science doesn't make claims about God's existence or purpose. Even if you propose that God did it, there is still the question of "how". Do you believe God controls the rain? Science understands rainfall. Does that mean God isn't in control? If you believe God can use natural processes to accomplish His will, why couldn't he use evolution?
VirologistTim 2 months ago
@macro343
Francis Collins believes there is a "designer" who used evolution to accomplish his purpose. He thinks DNA is evidence of a designer and calls it "the language of God." He didn't loose his job. He was appointed to be the director of the National Institute of Health. A top science position. Teachers loose their jobs when they refuse to teach what they are hired to teach and when they violate the establishment clause of the constitution that says they cannot promote religion.
VirologistTim 2 months ago
@transtlantic mutations are always bad.. can u give me an example of a positive mutation? in evolution a mutation has to be beneficial. They never find a positeve mutation, only negative ones.
Natural selection is just a quality control.. God did this so that an animal kind dont become weak, but that the population keeps strong. natural selection is like checking al new cars and take the bad ones out so only the good ones stays.
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
a positive mutation? sure: sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria. the humans with the mutation live longer, healthier and reproduce more than the ones without the mutation who die quicker and horribly due to malaria.
Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition
"just quality control"? so...no one dies? "God did"? prove it. where is your god?
animals are the fewest on this planet. try again.
So...still no answer to plant speciation w/out the theory of evo?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic thats a wonderfull example.. both sickle cell and malaria are bad... thats like saying cut of your leg so u cant get atleas foot..
The weaker ones die offcours.. cause the stronger ones are dominant. I dont have to prove god cause i admit its a religion, im not saying its science.. u say evolution is science well proof big bang? where did matter come from? where did the energie come from? where did the laws (ex. gravity) come from? how did organic organism started?
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
You clearl failed to understand the example. Sickle cell disorder is Good in an environment with malaria. Malaria is caused by a living organism, how is it "bad" for that living organism?
People who are born without legs don't get athletes foot, indeed. but that has nothing to do with the example i provided.
"the weaker ones die", you mean - Natural selection as explained by the theory of evolution. you contradict yourself.
ofc you have to prove god, or else it's a fairy.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic malaria is bad for humans dude and sickle cell is also bad for humans.. people who have sickle cell or slightly resistant to malaria.. But both or negative. like my example. cut of your legs (sickle cell) so u never get atleas foot (malaria). understand it.
natural selection produces microevolution not macraevolution. natural selection explains survival of the fittest not origin of the fittest. u think because natural selection is true that evolution is true..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Malaria is bad? not for some humans. Humans with sickle cell disease are protected from malaria. How is it "bad"? they live longer and reproduce more than any other non-mutant human in the same environment.
"but both negative"? do you even read what you write here? you contradict yourself.
Sickle cell isn't the same as malaria. stop being stupid.
Your example is not even similar. it's apples and oranges.
Micro is the exact same as macro. Natural selection is for both.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic omg.. if a person has sickle cell he is still sick and dont life very long.. is that postive even if he lives in a area where malaria is? nice positive mutation, u have pain the rest of your live but its positive cause otherwise u could have malaria.. and u live longer so u will have even more pain in your live what a nice positive mutation.. "and both negative" is what i meant, dont be stupid ok :) there not the same, but there both bad. nothing positive..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Everyone is sick with something. And the ones with sickle cell disease live LONGER and healthier than the non-mutants, in areas where malaria is endemic. Ofc that's positive, don't you think living longer and healthier is positive?
Better than dying quickly and painfully with malaria and not even being able to raise a kid, don't you think?
Everything positive.
Your lies are starting to fall pretty quickly. I could have mentioned the knock out Duffy gene mutation, for example.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic people whit sickle cell live longer whit pain there hole live and u can do nothing against it.. nice live dude realy positive.. So raising a kid is the ultimate goal of live, produce yourself.. And raising a kid while u have pain ur hole live.. thats so positive for the kid having parents that have pain there entairely live..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Lolol i've been writing Speciation for quite some time now, and you now ask where the novel species come from? lolol proof that you really are clueless about science. HA HA HA HA HA HA
People with sickle cell disease in an environment with malaria live longer with less pain than the non-mutants, their whole lives. And you can do something about it.
Ofc it's positive. the non-mutants die quicker and with more pain.
Ergo the mutation is positive. are you retarded?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic it had to start from somewhere didnt it? What was in the beginning? answer it me whit science, u cant answer this only when u add some faith in it... answersingenesis /articles/cm/v16/n2/anaemia a good site about sickle cell doesnt prove evolution.
macro343 2 months ago
@transtlantic what did the first organism eat? how did it reproduced itself? when did it find a mate?why arent the elements in the stars not shared equial?
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
the big bang is physics or astronomy. Biology studies life, evolution (biological) is about the evolution of living things. And i don't have to explain the big bang if you ask me about how a car works, don't you agree?
"how did organic organisms started": Well we do knot that our species evolved from a parent species.
I can produce lot's of questions too! look:
How do you explain random mutations without evolution?
How do you explain Natural selection w/out evolution?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic theres also cosmic, chemical, planetary evolution... u dont have to explain me how the big bang worked, explane me what exploted and where did it come from? u evolutionist never answers where the information comes from? only how it works..
where did the parent species come from?
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Actually..natural selection does explain the origin of the fittest. What makes you think it doesn't? I think because you can't explain Plant speciation without using evolution theory, therefore evolution must be true.
don't you agree?
"what exploted"? i don't follow.
Since when do you have to talk about the big bang if someone asks you how a car works?
"information" isn't an individual entity. you are doing a reification fallacy. look it up.
parent species come from another species
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic i explained plants, can u explain it whit evolution then? ok try me..
yes what exploded? dont be stupid and answer the simple question, if ur so smart. Where does evrything we have and see come from? (elements,...) and dont say this is not evolution cause it has to do whit evolution..
"parent species come from another species" ok, and where did the other species come from, again another species? ok, where did that coem from?....
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
You didn't explain Plant speciation. I am smarter than you. "we have, we see come from"? you mean...like a toy? toy factory,. A human being? sexual reproduction. How is talking about the big bang helping me to explain how a car moves? please focus.
I am talking about Biological evolution, which has nothing to do with cosmological evolution. apples and oranges, you stupid brat.
species -> novel species. Evolution proved. don't you agree? or do you have anything to prove otherwise?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic ur not answering my questions :s u admit i have a faith but u have an socalled science evolution.. Well, prove it.. u explain me origans of plants. where did sexual reproduction started?
Where did the novel species come from?
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Down syndrome appears by a mutation that the parents (99,999% of the times) did not have. try again.
I am answering your questions, not all of them. I am awaiting for you to answer my question:
How do you explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory?
Origin of the plants? speciation from a non-plant species.
Sexual reproduction? probably a mutation out of "voluntary" hermaphroditism.
Now...are you going to answer my questions?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic creation.com/did-plants-evolve site that plants didnt evolved..
And down syndrome is a positive mutation? nice going u freak..
"Origin of the plants? speciation from a non-plant species." Hahaha so funny keeping avoiding the question.. Cause u know that if we go far enough in time u have to belive it came from rocks where it rained for millions of year on it.. all answers that required believe, not science kid..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
look... Plant speciation is FACT. you can't deny it.
What is a "positive mutation" for you? because, according to the KNOWN definition: Sickle cell disease IS A positive mutation in an environment with malaria. And where is it in the definition of evolution that you "must" have positive mutations? where?
Where am i avoiding your questions? i am answering. "it came from rocks"? who says that? where is that written? you are confusing Abiogenesis with Evolution. 2 different things.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic ramdom mutations are all neutral or negative.. It has nothing to do whit evolution but whit the second law of thermodynamics. Evrything degrades over time.. your body degrades, buildings degrades,... We humans have some neutral of negative mutations because we are a copie of a copie of a copie of a copie of the first human.. so we lose information.. LIke when u scan a piece of paper whit text on it print it, scan it, print it,... do that 1000 times, and tell me if u can still read
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Random mutations are mostly neutral, and less than 10% either beneficial or non-beneficial. Molecular biology of the cell, 5th edition. Sorry...but your magic thinking does not substitute the fact that science keeps proving your claims wrong. The laws of thermodynamics, it's physics, not biology. you tards should really try pick a science book...
"everything degrades"? where does it say that? in what book?
The body also grows. buildings are built....
energy + work =>order
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic indeed the body grows beacuse we eat food and or body is designed to use that energy in order to grow. but even if we still keep taking food (energy) ultimately we will still die because where getting old and worser (degrading)
u only can use energy if u have something that can utilise the energy...
"buildings are built" if a building is made it whil degrade and people whil try to maintain the building, but even when they do it whil ultimately fall down over time.
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Our body grows because of a genotype that expresses a phenotype. ALL of this because of evolution. "we metabolize"? we don't breathe oxygen, some organisms, breathe iron other sulphur. Why? How? oh right: evolution again. Actually we grow old due to Senescence. That's not "degrading": it's part of life.
"use"..."utilize", they are both synonyms. Everything is energy.
"people will try to mantain". wrong: energy will be invested - us working. energy put into a system to build.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic again u ar talking about how a human body works, we can see it and its a fact but then ur believe is creeping in you telling this is all because of evolutioooon... Origings isnt answerable bij science but u need to have a faith if u want answers on origins of humans, plants, space, matter, time exc.. people get old and become weaker..
a rock is energy?
again that means people while try to maintain buildings otherwise they whil fall faster..
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
Actually it's fact:
You can't understand how the human body is so diverse or has disorders without understanding evolution theory.
How do you explain Down syndrome without using evolution theory? Sickle cell disease? adenoids problems in humans? no other explanation but evolution.
A rock is matter, and matter is a form of energy.
So...when are you going to answer to my challenge:
How do you explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory?
the question is not going away.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic "A rock is matter, and matter is a form of energy." some matter is energy and u can use it, but a rock isnt energy lol, dont make a delusion.
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
A rock can be turned into energy. How do you think Nuclear Power plants work?
You clearly are retarded, you dumb kid.
"it had to start somewhere"? sure. Rain is water that comes from clouds. but why would we have to mention the ocean in order to explain how rain falls down to the earth? we don't need to.
"what was the beginning"? of our species? from the parent species - Homo erectus.
"good site"?
Harrison's principles of internal medicine, 17th edition - evolution proven.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@transtlantic Once more the evidence of the real world is seen to be consistent with the truth of Genesis; plants reproduce “according to their kind”. That is, gingkos have consistently produced gingkos, pines have consistently produced pines, and magnolias have consistently produced magnolias ever since the Creator spoke them into existence to reproduce “after their kind”.
macro343 2 months ago
@macro343
"the first,..." the point here is to SHOW that evolution happens today. You can't deny it.
Once more the evidence of the real world proves the genesis christian fiction story is false. "plant" isn't the name of any species. It's species that change. A rose isn't a tree. A plant originating a novel species didn't reproduce according to kind, it produced a new kind.
"gingkos", etc have many species. and they all originated new species or share a common ancestor.
transtlantic 2 months ago
@macro343
what do you call the theory that explains how a distinct population of a species of magnolias originate a novel species of magnolias by means of random mutations and natural selection?
I don't follow...how is the FACT that the Homo erectus originated ALL modern human beings..."reproducing after their kind"?
You really are fucking retarded and you keep failing to explain Plant speciation w/out using evolution theory.
my challenge isn't going away.
transtlantic 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@transtlantic U mean microevolution and thats a fact, but like i said it just means variations, u see a tiger and a lion = microevolution (fatc) but then u ultimately wanne say that evreything is related over time = macroevolution (believe)
macro343 2 months ago
@analfetus1 'and that fossils are a valid source of info': When i see fossils, i conclued: hmm that thing whatever it was is dead.. Fossils arent big prove for evolution cause u cant use that as evidence.. im a person of faith.. what about u
macro343 2 months ago
Comment removed
analfetus1 2 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored The same sort of variety exists in both living and extinct reptiles—some with teeth, some without. Some humans have teeth some dont....
And u say i have a baselies belief, what about u? urs even worse..
macro343 3 months ago
@macro343
"some with teeth, some without. Some humans have teeth some dont...."
LOL NO chickens are different its some lose their teeths.
ITS THEY DONT HAVE TEETH BUT SOMTIMES THE ODD ONE IS BORN WITH TEETH.
EXPLAIN WHY THEY INACTIVE DNA FOR TEETH!
Your belief is baseless thats what religion is defined as, thats why you require FAITH, science Evolution doesnt require any baseless beleif EG faith. The evidence is there for all to see.
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
@gorilla199uncensored it shows that the gene pool of the chicken’s created kind included the capacity to generate teeth. In other words, the genetic flexibility (variety) existed in the original gene pool to generate daughter populations in which some had teeth, some didn’t.
extinct birds are known from the fossils which did have teeth (while others did not).
what evicence? tell me i really wanne hear ur best evidence u have? give me the best u have for ur *science* evolution...
macro343 3 months ago
gorilla199uncensored 3 months ago
Christians like to PRETEND there is a 'controversy' within the Scientific community but there isn't one at all. There's evolution which is a factual basis for all life on the planet and then there is Creationism/ID which doesn't even enter the Scientific arena and is 100% Science FICTION.
Believers often forget that God, the Bible, and Jesus are all 100% MAN-MADE inventions. It was Man who made GOD, not the other way around.
Instead of being 'Born-Again' why don't you guys just GROW THE FUCK UP?
ColonPal 3 months ago
To all creationists - Since god exists "outside of space and time" stop wasting space and time trying to convince people that god created everything inside space and time. Just believe it if you want to and STFU.
betamale3 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey, kiddos, want to see a fairy tale that adults really believe? Google whale evolution and go watch a 7 minutes video on the PBS web site that shows how an ancient 200 pound wolf searched for food along the beach, wander out into the surf, and morphed (evolved) into a 100 ton whale. There is nothing scientific about it, but nonetheless, this is the fairy tale that some adults really believe! Especially comical are the nostrils migrating to the top of the head to become a blow hole!
achilles197474 3 months ago
You guys are so cute. - God
neccowaif9 4 months ago
creationism has been "intelligently designed", evolution is natural ;)
teramasz 4 months ago 2
you can't PROVE that god dosnt exist but you can find enough evidence in the origins of religion and the mind, its contridictions with well established evidence based science, and tons of evidence based science itself to KNOW BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that god dosnt exist. you cant PROVE philosophical materialism right but you can be sure BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. evolution has enough evidence to be beyond unreasonable doubt
drbarry00 5 months ago
What's the chance that cdesignproponists will develop their own vaccines, not using science and an understanding of evolutionary biology, but using pure Godly magic? What puzzles me is that so many creationists still get a flu shot. How do those theotards think flu vaccines are created? If you're a creationist, why even go to the doctor, why not save your money, and just pray to God for a magical recovery? I'll tell you why - because you know you're full of shit!
a0eoj 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T CREATE. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. It only operates once there is life and reproduction and not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. Natural selection is a passive process, not a creative process. The real issue is not natural selection but what biological variations are possible in nature. Read my Internet article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS' BLIND WATCHMAKER IS NO ARGUMENT. DNA sequence isn't like a watch. And, even if the parts of a watch come together by chance, that doesn't mean the parts could be produced by chance. An incomplete watch can last a long time until its human DESIGNER completes it. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read my Internet article HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 5 months ago
@Mogley52
IF YOU SAY THINGS IN CAPITALS THEN IT'S MUCH MORE CONVINCING!!!
TheOmegajuice 5 months ago 4
@Mogley52 do a bit more research kid
tonyspacecowboy 5 months ago
@Mogley52
you are just full of shit.
You are doing a hoyle's fallacy.
What the fuck is a "partially" evolved cell? abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution, you ignorant shihead.
transtlantic 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
The only controversy is that Intelligent design/creationism is ever taken seriously. Its saying magic makes things, how is this even taken seriously.
believerornot 5 months ago
Only in America.
rpsmith014 5 months ago 2
I'm a full fledge retard,who bang my head in a wall 24/7 and eat glue- and even I understand that evolution is true.
I mean, look at viruses,bacterias etc you can even change their dna and see how they adapt in our lifetime.
quezcatol 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
FinallyTheNight 5 months ago
There is no controversy. Evolution has been proven time and again. It's beyond all reasonable doubt. Creationism and ID are not science. End of story..... or at least it should be. /sigh
Arikiel 5 months ago 30
its funny this is still referred to as a "controversy"....because anyone with any significant measure of intelligence and rationality knows well enough that creationism is entirely and completely undeserving of serious consideration as an explanation for reality.....
kaishininjou 5 months ago 37
the way i see it the debate is simply this: did consciousness develop out of physical reality; or was physical reality created by consciousness?
We don't know enough about either consciousness or 'reality' to say definitively which is true, but I think Mark Twain said it best:
"It is all a Dream, a grotesque and foolish dream. Nothing exists but you. And You are but a Thought — a vagrant Thought, a useless Thought, a homeless Thought, wandering forlorn among the empty eternities"
eleutheromaniac 5 months ago
@eleutheromaniac
Well, you are looking at another debate then, because none of this one has anything to do with such solipsistic nonsense.
Harizl 5 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Harizl what do you think God is?
eleutheromaniac 5 months ago
@eleutheromaniac
We know much about consciousness. Look into neural networks. I myself have programmed artificial neural networks. They can take inputs from stimuli, give outputs, and learn. All within a computer.
proatheism 5 months ago
@proatheism what you're describing is the physical mechanisms of the brain, that's not consciousness. for example, when your brain creates a dream, your consciousness is localized within that dream. So even though you are surrounded by your brain's creation, your mind, your 'self', is seperate and distinct from that creation.
a computer could theoretically do the same thing, create a universe within itself, and then create living systems within that universe that possessed a distinctive mind
eleutheromaniac 5 months ago
@eleutheromaniac
Its more than the physical mechanisms of the brain. It's a replica of the internal workings. We know that the neuron uses summation gates of all the inputs of the dendrites to calculate an action potential. If that action potential reaches a critical mass it gives signals to the neurons connected to its axon based on a weight system. Inputs and outputs are merely neurons that go to the body. Every piece can and has been replicated.
proatheism 5 months ago
@proatheism where is the subject? what is the subject? i.e. "who" is observing these 'inputs and outputs'?
decision-making has a physical process (that is what you're describing); evolution/change has a physical process; continuity/memory has a physical process: but *where* is the physical process describing subjectivity? *what* is the physical process for subjectivity? *how* does this physical process work? and *why* does subjectivity even exist in the first place?
eleutheromaniac 5 months ago
Comment removed
eleutheromaniac 5 months ago
No controversy, just idiocy.
Cataclysm31 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weeb¬ly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's a scary world as the allopathic medical dictatorship confounds gender with blood-intoxicating hormones and mutilates, through surgery, the genitalia of retardates in order to make barren, pseudo-women of homosexual men.
ScientificalnessUSA 5 months ago
["This is the scientific reality that the seeds of all common fruits (except citrus) contain vitamin B17, an anti-cancer vitamin. If we ingest proper quantities of these vitamins, either in the pure form or through ingesting the nitrilosidic foods, we will be able to prevent cancer just as surely as we are able to prevent scurvy by the use of vitamin C or pernicious anemia by the use of vitamin B12." — Ernest Krebs, Jr.]
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
“All things weird are normal in this whore of cities.” — Eddie Constantine as secret agent 003 Lemmy Caution in Jean-Luc Godard's 1965 film “Alphaville”
ScientificalnessUSA 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
FinallyTheNight, ScientificalnessUSA, AgonyInCrisis's & many more.
All the same person. A major troll on this upload.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
developmentalist also developmentist : EVOLUTIONIST
ScientificalnessUSA 6 months ago
Conjecture is important as one can't revise, invent, innovate, improve upon, or correct without imagination.
ScientificalnessUSA 6 months ago
That's the answer. We postulate to fill in the blanks of what our meager senses are incapable of registering. Science is knowledge as perceived by humans. How could it be anything else?
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
Is it wrong that I've fallen in love with Eugenie's mind? I love the way her suppressed enthusiasm sometimes trips her up. A very rare lady.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
@GuillemotWatcher : Evolutionary Corporator Eugenia Scott is a lady in the same vein that the public facility with toilets for women sports the plastic placard: LADIES.
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
@FinallyTheNight I don't have to take seriously someone who would write this. From your channel - "The extraterrestrial alien influence should be acknowledged in any discussions concerning morality. The U.S. government is actively trading children for technology. The electronic/computerized marvels of the age, beginning after the unprecedented carnage of W.W.II, are not the products of human ingenuity, but humanoid ingenuity."
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
@GuillemotWatcher : You don't have to ride the bus either. Ignorance lulls you.
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
@FinallyTheNight You may need counselling. You have multiple channels & you're friends with yourself.
Now I talking to ScientificalnessUSA (another one of your channels), conjecture is important. Beliefs are perpetuated, critical thinking advances.
Hello FinallyTheNight, You, (& I include your other identities) may know the language but in striving to come across as intellectual you come across real intellects. I'm one of them & I'll be watching for you in what ever guise you present yourself.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
@GuillemotWatcher : You need niacin.
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
theoretic n, pl theoretics : the speculative part of an art or science : THEORY ["Webster's Unabridged Dictionary," 1967]
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
@FinallyTheNight "theoretic n, pl theoretics : the speculative part of an art or science : THEORY"
Yes, principally that's what science is, to speculate & develop theories that best explain phenomena. But the lexicon of science is very specific. Accepted theories must be supported by evidence & be peer reviewed. The theory of evolution, based on Darwin's work, could have been blown apart by the discipline of genetics, but it massively supports natural evolution.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
Comment removed
FinallyTheNight 6 months ago
Comment removed
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FinallyTheNight We think deeply about such different things. It's been slightly surreal to have had contact with you. There is no way I can wish you anything but a long and happy life.
GuillemotWatcher 6 months ago