How do we know it was a billion years? Where did matter come from if it can neither be created or destroyed? How was the big bang produced? How is it that every little detail of matter could be created out of chance?
@TheAdawon 1) radiometric dating of igneous rock 2) symmetry breaking 3) cern is working on it 4) what? anyway, mere chance or guided chance makes a huge difference
Everyone look up the following video title: "Protect IP Bill is WORSE than S.978 and being RUSHED". It's a matter of saving or losing good videos like this.
if the world embraced science 600yrs ago we would be 1000 yr more adv then we are 2day, but instead they made the study of science wrong.thats whats happens when we let religion rule the world,and over 2/3 of all the wars in the history of man was caused by religion.
Evolutionist are just as religious as creationist and they should not be going around saying that if their supposed "evidence" doesn't convince you then your blinded by religion and dumb because truly there is still no solid evidence that supports evolution, and I had watched this video hoping to find some, but no. They are just touting what I call "phantom facts" which are just theories, assumptions, and imaginative thinking that they have collectively agreed to accept and mask as a real fact.
The incongruity of evolution of the horse becomes more obvious as more fossils are found modern horse species Equus nevadensis and Equus occidentalis fossils have been found in the same layer as Hyracotherium. This indicatates that the modern horse and the supposed ancestor lived at the same time period. Boyce Rensberger noted the scenario of the horse has no foundation in the fossil record, and that no evolution process has been observed that would account for the gradual evolution of horses.
@SoulsResonance You really need to stop reading creationist websites and try looking at the actual science. Equus nevadensis and Equus occidentalis living in the same time period has no bearing on whether one evolved from the other. In either case your claim is bogus. The claim made in "The Neck of the Giraffe" is based on an almost-classification of a few molars in the early 20th century and that classification didn't stick. Rather than watching an hour long video, try reading the book!
@JustinZimmer6 Sir as I said before I'am not a creationist. Not agreeing with evolution doesn't inherently make a person a creationist the world is not so black and white, so please spare me the crap. I have never ever been to a creationist website either. Now on to the matter at hand, you asked for a citation well a quick little internet search will give you all the sources you need to find that the horse evolution is NOT BASED ON FACT, but ASSUMPTIONS and OPINIONS.>>>continue
@JustinZimmer6 Now as for the site you directed me to I shall look into it as I said before I am looking for solid evidence, and cold hard facts. I'm not against evolution just as of yet completely unconvinced as they have yet to provide any of that. Also you have not seemed to comment on my genetics argument I find that strange surly you have a rebuttal for that as well.
@SoulsResonance You're funny. If by "they" you mean the scientific community at large you sure seem to have a chip on your shoulder. If you aren't finding evidence for evolution then you aren't looking very hard, or you have some sort of ridiculous definition of evidence and "fact". A simple Google search returns all you need to know about that horse evolution canard you posted. Both your "genetics" and "horse evolution" claims are repeated throughout creationist literature --- cont
@SoulsResonance Try looking up "Modern Evolutionary Synthesis" genetics is a large part of the modern theories explaining HOW evolution works. A great deal works by genetic drift. If you are studying "genetics" and evolution isn't making sense then I'd have to question where you are getting your genetics. In Richard Dawkins' book "The Greatest Show on Earth" and Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" both cover these issues in great detail. TalkOrigins has every genetics claim you could cont --
@JustinZimmer6 First of all just stop suggesting that I am a creationist because my arguments are some they have used themselves. My reason for disagreeing with evolution is for studying objective material about genetics and so forth, I like to learn. After reading this information I had began to question evolution as what I had learned did not seem to agree with my CURRENT knowledge about it, you should note that I initially did agree with evolution.>>continue.
@JustinZimmer6 I'm willing accept evolution, and will look up what you suggested, but what I have found out about it so far has not convinced me yet. I will admit that perhaps I shouldn't have had such an infallible tone in my first few post, but I simply just don't agree yet. What I have found so far is assumptions and theories that's not enough for me. I have no "religion" or faith I simply believe in the universe and nature I say this so you let go of your seeming polarized view of me.
@SoulsResonance I'm using the term "creationist" because the claims you were making, including calling evolution a "religion", and that there is no evidence for evolution among the specific claims are textbook creationist propaganda. If you are simply someone who stumbled upon one of these subversive sites, then I apologize for making that assumption based on the evidence I had.
@SoulsResonance If you are a pantheist as you describe yourself, then you will want to understand evolution as best you can, as it is truly a means by which the universe comes to know itself. That evolution has occurred is incontrovertable, the evidence is plain to see. The theory is in how this evolution occured and it adjusts to new evidence and discovery. I would recommend "The Greatest Show on Earth" then first, it goes into the depths of possible abiogenesis and embryology.
@JustinZimmer6 During our little back and forth I have been looking through talkorigins(dot)org and I like it, it seems I'm finally going to settle my mind about this. What I don't understand about this whole "evos" v "creas" thing is why it even matters I'm only interested in the facts and science I assure you, and I do want to understand as best I can. I must say it seems am I under informed my understanding was based on dated info and claims about evolution. I have enjoyed our little spat
@SoulsResonance I'm glad to see you're on the right track. As far as the creationism vs evolution is concerned, it stems from a religious need to view the biblical creation myths as literal histories and reject the notion that humans are part of the animal kingdom. There are shades beyond this, but the core of the arguments is the same. Creationists feel that if evolution is true then Adam and Eve are false and so loosens the grip of original sin and therefore makes people immoral.
@SoulsResonance In fact it is perceived that if we think we evolved from other animals that we would therefore act like animals. This also removes humankind's place as a special creation. This is repeated nearly as much as supposed refutations of evolution. What is frustrating to scientists is that these people try to force creationism into science by means of politics and deceit and often even misquote scientists for their agenda (and there is an agenda, I mentioned the Wedge Doc earlier)
@SoulsResonance Creationists seldom come up with new issues with evolution, rather they ignore rebuttals and simply repeat the same old straw men and repackage their mission to seem less "biblical" and therefore attract more people who frankly don't know any better. If what they were practicing was science they would come up with their own theory to explain the abundance of data; they don't. They just create distractions and try to seed doubt. It's a nuisance for those doing real science.
@SoulsResonance It's sort of like what moon-landing denialists are to NASA. What is disturbing, especially given the religious nature of their base, is the amount of dishonesty used. It's not that creationists are necessarily stupid, but they employ many misleading tactics and outright lies to deliver their message. There is a lot of stupidity involved, but there are elements that will sneak in their message, whether through legislation or bogus review articles who's dishonesty is intentional.
@SoulsResonance The evidence produces the data by which the theory is developed. Analyze the evidence presented, and judge for yourself if the theory matches the data. The idea, again, is not to believe in evolution, but to understand it. If you don't understand it, then you are simply agreeing with people who say it's true. And, that makes you succeptible to "alternative ideas" that sound sciency, but are really misdirections for laymen to meet an agenda. Look up the "wedge document".
@SoulsResonance Since you're not a creationist, don't be offended if you'll find the defense of your claims in the archive under "Index of Creationist Claims". YouTube doesn't let me post links, but you'll probably find yours under CB101.2. BTW, Darwinismrefuted(dot)com is an intelligent design site, which is merely a legally subversive form of creationism. I'm assuming that's where you got these "scientific" claims of yours, since you seem to be. Try looking at the full context of some of their
@SoulsResonance quotes, you might find them frighteningly deceptive. Try looking at the actual evidence. I've given you three sources, any one of which by themselves contains more information than every ID/Creationist site out there combined (from redundancy). Or swing by whyevolutionistrue(dot)com and read a little or engage in discussion. Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution. Life is an amazing phenonenon once you begin to understand how it works.
@SoulsResonance what you won't find on any of these so-called "debunking" sites is an alternative explanation, at least one that doesn't begin with "In the beginning..." or involve boatloads of animals floating for a year without food or apparent predation and then somehow becoming distributed across several distant landmasses.
Also please don't mistake me for a creationist, but I simply won't jump on this bandwagon until some more things are cleared up. Also the fact the this man is using that outdated, already ready proven wrong several times, and several years ago "evolution of the horse" chart as part of his "evidence" is just disreputable.
@SoulsResonance "proven wrong several times", please cite your sources. Then try actually reading the book "Why Evolution is True" rather than watching a video in search of evidence. For a non-creationist, you certainly employ their underhanded and poorly researched methods. Try TalkOrigins(dot)org, I'm sure you'll find that those things that seem to keep you off the "bandwagon" of science and reason will be cleared up quite nicely.
New genetic information is needed to make one species into another and mutation does not or at least has not been proven to do this.A mutation almost always involves a loss of information or just a copy of information. They have never added new information to the genome, so it appears that they can never bring that genome added complexity. This contradicts evolution's saying that over time some organisms grew more complex and genomes changed This simply has not been demonstrated to be possible.
If anyone took out the time to study genetics they would quickly understand that evolution just isn't right. Evolution does not follow the laws of genetics as the say that through micro-evolution(which is really just variation and shouldn't even be called evolution), mutations occur over time creating new alleles, but that doesn't make since because this process only rearranges or deletes information ALREADY present>>> Continue
All the evidence in the world will not convince creationists that evolution is true because it contradicts their faith. Reason vs Superstition ladies and gentlemen. I've decided to stop wasting my breath trying to speak reason to them because there is nooooo point
Evolution isn't true lol. There's no real scientific proof just fairy tales that are worse then pagan myths. Anything to knock God out of the picture. Repent people you can run but you can't hide.
@mamainmancj you can run but you cant hide ? Do you really think thats a message a loving god who created us would deliver ? I believe in "GOD" but my "God" is the universe, why cant we just give peace and love a chance ?
One more thing. i think Mother Earth Knew that there would one day in time be some corrupt selfish person or group of people who would try and use the knowledge of astrology/biology/evolution to their advantage as a tool to control future civilization. Therefore Mother earth prepared us(Atheist/Logical Thinkers) for this. She allowed Preservation so that Archaeologist can literally do there job and UNCOVER(dig up) THE TRUTH to the past Evolution Process and it's Existence..
i can prove there's no god and that evolution is true.. go fuck your mom and/or sister. get her pregnant, see if the baby comes out deformed or with some type of mental illness. God fucked his Daughter had a Son named Jesus. and i guess Jesus came out normal. Adam and Eve were brother and sis. wait she was made from Adams rib. So basically Adam fucked himself and The process started . if that were the case everyone on earth is mentally ill. WAKE UP PEOPLE. EVOLUTION IS TRUTH! simplest form
i believe that we aren't the only thing(s) out there that Big Bang and evolution created. there's more. just the simple fact that we humans can't breathe outside of earth is enough evidence to show that we started on earth as micro organisms and that we've evolved for billions of years and adapted to this environment. there's no creator, that whole god created everything is just a control scheme. and people are so gullible. they actually believe that crap is true. fucking crazy world we live in.
@JungleJargon No evidence of evolution? That is quite a bold statement to be made since the whole lecture above is devoted to presenting scientific evidence for evolution. Did you even listen to it before you decided to comment?
Those who deny Evolution can do so as they like. If they have offspring, they are actively participating in it whether they like it or not. I love the irony in this.
The fact that there are people operating under sufficient delusion to add comment after comment (to the cumulative total of 3,700+) about some alleged private revelations to some 2,000 year old prehistoric figures is testimony to the need for them to get a real life rather than a born-again one---with all its supernaturally speculative childishness.
@LAlba9 BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-1. - The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true - "He hangs the earth on nothing."
@LAlba9BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#68 There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.
@LAlba9SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#57 Our bodies are made from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7; 3:19). Scientists have discovered that the human body is comprised of some 28 base and trace elements - all of which are found in the earth
@LAlba9 -FOREKNOWLEDGE-#56 There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.#34 Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.
@LAlba9 -BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#59 Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the "springs of the sea." Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain.
@LAlba9 BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#54 The Bible specifies the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel (Genesis 6:15). Ship builders today are well aware that the ideal dimension for ship stability is a length six times that of the width. Keep in mind, the bible ststed ideal dimensions for Noahs ark 4,500 years ago.
@LAlba9.BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE# 1-66 - The earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). At a time when many thought the earth was flat, the Bible told us that the earth is spherical. BIBLICAL FOREKNOWLEDGE# 1-68 - Scripture assumes a revolving (spherical) earth (Luke 17:34-36). Jesus said that at His return some would be asleep at night while others would be working at day time activities in the field,a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night occurring simultaneously.
@LAlba9 biblical science foreknowledge # 44 - Ocean currents anticipated (Psalm 8:8). Three thousand years ago the Bible described the "paths of the seas." In the 19th century Matthew Maury - the father of oceanography - after reading Psalm 8, researched and discovered ocean currents that follow specific paths through the seas! Utilizing Maury's data, marine navigators have since reduced by many days the time required to traverse the seas.
@SirDainOfBramaged err?hello? ALL of the geological evidence supports it if you ignore the fraudulent dating methods! .Billion & billions of dead things rapidly fossilized[ by the entire herd!] fossils of shells etc on top of every mountain on earth,stratafication.We share the same evidence but i just choose NOT to interpret it via Methodological Naturalism.As any method of evidential interpretational presuppositions must assume the very point in dispute,its a faith choice for both parties.
Both silly and irrelevant. Silly because it's a real stretch to see this as descriptive rather than poetic or common understanding. Irrelevant because proving God exists and/or had a hand in creating the Bible doesn't prove that Genesis 1 should be taken so literally or that the Theory of Evolution is false.
Origin of life? Finally, he admits he is stumped. Common ancestor because of Similar DNA? That is an assertion. God created life with similar DNA because if works. God can create life any way He wants to. If they cannot come up with a reasonable way that life began then to assume a common ancestor makes no sense.
@jplogsdon " Origin of life? Finally, he admits he is stumped. Common ancestor because of Similar DNA? That is an assertion. God created life with similar DNA because if works. God can create life any way He wants to."
You just asserted that a god created life so how is that any different from your accusation of Dr Coynes? The reason why we share DNA with other creatures on our planet proves beyond a doubt that we all share a common ancestor.
he is advocating killing unborn children. What a jerk. That is an atheist for you--no purpose in life. I suppose Hitler was not a bad guy since his behavior was just an evolutionary adaption.
@wowamonn if we evolved then there is no objective morality. We are the product of our environment. We are what we are because of our surroundings. There is no free will, we act in a way that will help in our survival. If someone rapes a child he is just acting out his biological impulses.
@heymanhmm Your objection to Evolution is based on humans practicing morality? Culture is unique among our species and that is the primary reason that negates the more primitive urge to go around raping and slaughtering each other. There are ton of papers on cognitive Psychology that deals with the benefits of being nice to each other and human Intelligence would you like me to recommend a few papers for you to read?
@wowamonn I've already read a lot of books and papers on the subject--I am a scientist by the way. You mentioned Stephen Hawking and the big bang--how did the original particles begin--how did space itself and time begin? Would you like me to recommend a book for you to read?
@wowamonn BS Chemistry, doctor of pharmacy, graduate courses in Chemistry and math--University of Illinois. I know basic evolution from the few courses I took and the books I read. I read 'From So Simple A Beginning' The Four Great Book of Charles Darwin' (The Voyage of the Beagle,On the origin of Species, The Descent of Man, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals). .
@heymanhmm That's odd. And you still do not understand how Evolution works? I recommend the book " The Language of God " by Dr Francis Collins ' Evolutionist ' and a Christian and Also ' Just a Theory and Finding Darwin's God' both by Dr Kenneth Miller also a ' Evolutionist' and a Christian
@wowamonn I just noticed you had read Ehrman's books. I did too. I even mailed him questions and he responded right away. He lost the debate against William Lane Craig. On Bill Mahr and Jon Stewart he talked about how the bible verse, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not in the orig manusc. but we already know that, the bible even says that with a footnote, it was obvious that the audience never even read the bible.
@heymanhmm William lane Craig as far I know, accepts Evolution by Natural Selection. I watched the debate between WLC and Ehrman an I came to a different conclusion. Ehrman's arguments were well constructed and logical. WLC's were not. Sorry but you not only claim that a god exists but he is also the Christian god. You have not demonstrated how this is possible.
I did say over and over again but you are not willing to accept it. Re-read my posts. My belief in creation has nothing to do with the attributes of God or whether he is the Christian God. That is a separate issue.
I'm not at all against teaching evolution in schools by the way. Children should be given all the data collected (fossil records, genetic info. etc.) and make up their own minds the conclusion. A teacher should not tell their students that the data shows there is no God (like what Coyne and others do).
@heymanhmm " A teacher should not tell their students that the data shows there is no God (like what Coyne and others do)."
To my knowledge most science teachers are very professional and leave their personal beliefs out of their work. However I do know that most creationist science teachers love to assert their beliefs into the curriculum.
@wowamonn not sure what school you went to but most science teachers do not bring up religion at all. They could get into trouble. Even the Christmas concerts are not allowed to mention Christ or God. The concerts are called "Festival of Lights" and just have generic songs without any reference to a God. Coyne's agenda is purely to spread atheism. His talks are sponsored by atheist organizations. He should focus on evolution and not worry so much about whether people are religious.
@heymanhmm " Coyne's agenda is purely to spread atheism. His talks are sponsored by atheist organizations. He should focus on evolution and not worry so much about whether people are religious."
Whats wrong with being an Atheist? And don't people have a right to talk about what they believe. I turn on the TV, on Sunday and nearly every other show on basic cable is a Religious show. I drive down the street I see churches signs saying something about your god.
@wowamonn you can be an atheist but it is inappropriate to spread your religious beliefs to the class. Why can Coyne talk about atheism to high school classes but science teachers are not allowed to mention God.
@heymanhmm " Why can Coyne talk about atheism to high school classes but science teachers are not allowed to mention God."
I have no idea what you are prattling on about. From the video Description it says that this was Sponsored by Atheist Alliance International 2009 conference. Not sure why you mention High schoolers. And why science teachers cant mention something about their religion? because it is science class. If you want to talk about religion do it in a humanities class.
@heymanhmm Do you live close to DC. There is a Reason Rally on March 24th 2012. The there is an Atheist convention on the 25th I believe. It may be interesting for you.
@wowamonn you have faith that there is no God. That is your ultimate reality and how you base your life. Your pastor are people like Jerry Coyne, atheist websites, etc. To say there is no God is a knowledge statement, it means you know something to be true. It is also a faith statement. An agnostic simply says he doesn't know; that it could be true, there could be a God.
you have faith there is no God. That is faith. Look up what faith means. You also live by your belief system and since you are here you get positive reinforcement from others of the same faith, which is a religious act. You are therefore, a religious person.
@heymanhmm " You are therefore, a religious person."
So I kinda demonstrated my observation. It don't really care if you try and force equivocate the meaning of the word faith and then create a Post-Hoc fallacy that it makes me a religious person. If that some how satisfies you, then go buy yourself a cookie. but that unfortunately that does not make the equivocation true or logical. And we both know it.
@heymanhmm " Your pastor are people like Jerry Coyne, atheist websites, etc"
I know that religious in-indoctrination plays a big part in pigeon holing the vocabulary of god worshipers. So it s not surprisings that you think Atheist-ism is a religion and that there are Atheist Pastors Etc. Because the vocabulary of the religious is conditioned in a very narrow and limited way. So it can be difficult for you to explain non-religious behavior in a non-religious way.
@heymanhmm What bothers you, in my opinion, is that more folks are becoming more secular, and leaving the religion of their parents. Religion had its run. In 50 years at least 60% of the U.S will be non-religious and that is a good thing.
@wowamonn it is estimated that more than 90% in the US believe in God. It has gone down slightly over the years but then rose again after 9/11. In the 1960's during the Bealtles era belief also temporarily went down then shot up again in the 1970's. Why is it that an atheist has never be elected to public office? Right now almost all countries have the atheist rate at about 1% including the USA. Only a few have around 20% and one has 30%. Not good stats for you, so who is worried?
@heymanhmm Well of course god worshipers will always be more numerous than Atheists. The god Meme has been passing on from generation to generation for thousands of years. And the Meme has a huge head start and it had thousands of years to perfect its appeal. What I do know is that god worshipers are the ones who getting alarmed at the rate of secularism in the US. The meme will never be flushed out of our species but its effects are being curtailed.
@heymanhmm " Even the Christmas concerts are not allowed to mention Christ or God. The concerts are called "Festival of Lights" "
Didn't the early church ban Christmas celebrations because they believed it was of pagan origin. You do know that Jesus was not an American right. And was an Arab Jew from the middle East?
@Kursinphists Therefore since faith has a broad range of usage. It is better to use it within the context of the discussion. Now science can only be done using the scientific method. Having faith in the religious use of the word is not valid. Do you understand the difference or would you like me to re-post the definition of the word Faith once again?
@wowamonn Not really; science has to also be done with a certain amount of faith. You said it yourself in the second definition of faith. A theory is not based on proof, therefore it is a belief.
@Kursinphists I am not sure if you saw any of my previous comments. But as I stated early. The word faith cannot be pigeon holed in to JUST a religious context. I am afraid religious conditioning may play a part in this very restricted use of the word.
@Kursinphists For example Aristoltle believed Emprdocles theory that everything was made out of four elements earth, air, fire, and water. This was a simple enough but did not make any definite predictions. On the other hand Newton's theory of gravity was based on an even simpler model in which bodies attracted each with a force that was proportional to a quantity called their mass and invertible proportional to the square of the distance between them.
@Kursinphists Now humans have 23 pairs of Chromosomes and chimpanzees have 24 pairs of Chromosomes. But how can that be since humans and Chimpanzees supposedly are related? Evolution predicted that some time in the past two chromosomes in the human linage must have fused together. Thus when we examined our DNA, scientists found that two chromosomes did indeed fuse together. Thus meeting the requirement for a good theory.
@wowamonn Sure, just like everything else related to humans. It's always "the chromosomes fused together", or "the deoxyribonucleic acids were more scrunched up here and here", or my personal favorite, "the bones look similar." I'm sorry, my friend, but it'll take more than that to convince me we're cousins of the apes.
@wowamonn Humans classified as Great Apes by...evolutionists? I don't recall me being classified as a great ape. A silly monkey in high school, maybe.
We're nothing like Chimpanzees. Just because our DNA's look similar doesn't mean we share a common ancestor. My DNA can look similar to my best friend's DNA, doesn't mean we share the same great-great-grandfather.
@Kursinphists " My DNA can look similar to my best friend's DNA, doesn't mean we share the same great-great-grandfather."
ERVs can only be passed on to offspring. Humans sure several ERVs. Now the Kicker is that these ERVS are in the same LOCATIONS in our DNA.The Question is why would two species share the same ERVs at the same locations?. It is almost mathematical impossible for this to occur.The ERV's accrued at these locations in our DNA before we speciated.
@Kursinphists " But we're not in the same location as chimpanzees, at least in the majority of the human population."
ERV's are genetic markers that we can use to trace our genetic history.. As humans we acquired Certain ERVs after we speciated. That is why when we do a DNA test on babies it is simple to figure out who are its parents.You can also tell what family branch in the human tree are its ancestors. When we compare a Humans DNA and a Chimps. Some ERVs are VERY old.
@Kursinphists " at least in the majority of the human population."
ERV's are lodged into our DNA at very specific locations when it is passed on, the ERV will be copied in the same DNA location. When two species have the same ERVs at the same locations that means that they shared an ancestor that passed on the copies to its offspring that later speciated. Do you understand?
@wowamonn Before this Christian man who said evolution was happening, who else said that there was something "evolving" amongst animals? I know there were others before Darwin who thought something similar.
@Kursinphists Lamarck. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. He believed that mutations can happen during a lifetime, such as a giraffe stretching it's neck, and then passing that onto their children.
@Kursinphists I recommend the book ' In search of Darwin's God" by Dr Ken Miller its pretty much available at most local libraries. He is a god worshiper like yourself but he is also an Evolutionary Biologist. You will find his explanation on the Evolution very interesting.
@wowamonn I'm already reading "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe. If what I heard is true, then no amount of explanation for evolution will ever be enough.
True, it's just one book, that is also why I'm reading "Origins: Creation or Evolution" by Richard B. Bliss (please don't give me crap about the last name, it's been done).
@Kursinphists " I'm already reading "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe. If what I heard is true, then no amount of explanation for evolution will ever be enough."
Sigh... Michael Behe believes in Descent with Modification. In other words he accepts speciation The only argument he is making is that these changes were guided by an Intelligence. And not by Natural Selection. If you don't believe me why don't you E-Mail him. He answers public E-Mails.
@wowamonn And what's wrong with being created through a superior intelligence? What's wrong with accepting that we humans don't know everything, but someone else does?
@Kursinphists Oh ya that's right Humans are special. We were created in the imagine of a god. That makes us different from all the other non-Human animals on our planet. We don't smell like animals, we don't have to eat like animals, we don't go to the bathroom like animals, we don't mate like animals, we don't give birth like animals, we don't behavior like other 'mere' animals. But we do look like gods don't we. Invisible, immortal, all powerful, sinless, ...Oh wait.
@Kursinphists Now that I have your attention. I will try to explain exactly what is a Scientific Theory. A theory is good is a good Theory if it satisfies two requirements. It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make a definite predictions about the results of future observations.
@heymanhmm Its very hard to you seriously, when you claim to be a scientist when you stone wall very logical arguments. Sorry but I don't believe you. All your rebuttals demonstrates this as well.
I don't ask you your education because it doesn't matter. There are very intelligent people on both sides of the issue. It only matters what you say not your credentials.
btw, if I really wanted to lie about my credentials I would have said I have a degree in biology not just a few evolution courses. It makes no sense to mention Chemistry, math and pharmacy which are unrelated to evolution.
@heymanhmm" I would have said I have a degree in biology not just a few evolution courses"
Most creationist try to pass themselves off as 'Scientists". I debated with a guy 2 Months who claimed he worked at Harvard in the Life sciences College. Needless to say he did thought Evolution occurred as a serial! So ya, I have experience with folks who pretend to know something about science when in fact, they do not.
Bad design, vestigial organs, biogeography and other parts of his talk are purely assertions whether it is due to evolution or creation without any scientific studies to show that. It is his opinion that it is due to evolution. So why is he against religious or philosophical opinions based on personal experience. I could shake an empty bag all day and all night for as long as I want to and when I open the bag it will still be empty.
@jplogsdon "Bad design, vestigial organs, biogeography and other parts of his talk are purely assertions whether it is due to evolution or creation without any scientific studies to show that"
Why would a god create Humans and Chimps with the gene to create Vitamin C and then switch it off using the SAME mutations? The answer is simple the Mutation occurred in the common ancestor of Humans and chimps and the mutations were passed on to both species during speciation.
@wowamonn why are you so confident in that assertion? God can switch on and off genes all He wants to, what does that have to do with anything? If creation occurred a different way you would still be looking for ways to leave God out. The creation of the universe from nothing is amazing. The order, the beauty, the way all organisms work together, the way we feel when we learn from our mistakes, etc. all point to a creator. You can deny it but you will always be in the minority.
@heymanhmm " why are you so confident in that assertion? God can switch on and off genes all He wants to, what does that have to do with anything?"
The point is this. Most plants and animals produce vitamin C. Molecular geneticists who examine DNA sequences from an evolutionary perspective confirmed that Humans have the gene encoding the enzyme protein known as L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase (GLO), which is required for synthesizing ascorbic acid.
@heymanhmm Sigh... I am going to re-post a part of my previous comment to answer your question, cool?
" Presumably this occurred separately in primate ancestors whose natural diets were so rich in ascorbic acid that the absence of GLO enzyme activity was not a disadvantage — it did not cause selective pressure against the defective gene."
@heymanhmm I will recommend the book 'A brief History of Time' by Stephen Hawking. It explains wonderfully the event of the Big Bang. And the world of quantum physics that explains Mathematically the functions of very small particles in our Universe. It is available at your local Library along with other fine books by Dr Laurence Kruss and Dr Neil DeGresse Tyson that will explain how our Universe works.
@wowamonn I took quantum mechanics in college. It does not explain how the universe began--Hawking is just putting his worldview into a theory to try to explain away God.
How do we know it was a billion years? Where did matter come from if it can neither be created or destroyed? How was the big bang produced? How is it that every little detail of matter could be created out of chance?
TheAdawon 4 days ago
@TheAdawon 1) radiometric dating of igneous rock 2) symmetry breaking 3) cern is working on it 4) what? anyway, mere chance or guided chance makes a huge difference
Diosukekun 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone look up the following video title: "Protect IP Bill is WORSE than S.978 and being RUSHED". It's a matter of saving or losing good videos like this.
jityr2 4 days ago in playlist 015 creation/evolution debate
if the world embraced science 600yrs ago we would be 1000 yr more adv then we are 2day, but instead they made the study of science wrong.thats whats happens when we let religion rule the world,and over 2/3 of all the wars in the history of man was caused by religion.
shadowsidestep 5 days ago
Evolutionist are just as religious as creationist and they should not be going around saying that if their supposed "evidence" doesn't convince you then your blinded by religion and dumb because truly there is still no solid evidence that supports evolution, and I had watched this video hoping to find some, but no. They are just touting what I call "phantom facts" which are just theories, assumptions, and imaginative thinking that they have collectively agreed to accept and mask as a real fact.
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
The incongruity of evolution of the horse becomes more obvious as more fossils are found modern horse species Equus nevadensis and Equus occidentalis fossils have been found in the same layer as Hyracotherium. This indicatates that the modern horse and the supposed ancestor lived at the same time period. Boyce Rensberger noted the scenario of the horse has no foundation in the fossil record, and that no evolution process has been observed that would account for the gradual evolution of horses.
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
@SoulsResonance You really need to stop reading creationist websites and try looking at the actual science. Equus nevadensis and Equus occidentalis living in the same time period has no bearing on whether one evolved from the other. In either case your claim is bogus. The claim made in "The Neck of the Giraffe" is based on an almost-classification of a few molars in the early 20th century and that classification didn't stick. Rather than watching an hour long video, try reading the book!
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@JustinZimmer6 Sir as I said before I'am not a creationist. Not agreeing with evolution doesn't inherently make a person a creationist the world is not so black and white, so please spare me the crap. I have never ever been to a creationist website either. Now on to the matter at hand, you asked for a citation well a quick little internet search will give you all the sources you need to find that the horse evolution is NOT BASED ON FACT, but ASSUMPTIONS and OPINIONS.>>>continue
SoulsResonance 5 days ago
@JustinZimmer6 Now as for the site you directed me to I shall look into it as I said before I am looking for solid evidence, and cold hard facts. I'm not against evolution just as of yet completely unconvinced as they have yet to provide any of that. Also you have not seemed to comment on my genetics argument I find that strange surly you have a rebuttal for that as well.
SoulsResonance 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance You're funny. If by "they" you mean the scientific community at large you sure seem to have a chip on your shoulder. If you aren't finding evidence for evolution then you aren't looking very hard, or you have some sort of ridiculous definition of evidence and "fact". A simple Google search returns all you need to know about that horse evolution canard you posted. Both your "genetics" and "horse evolution" claims are repeated throughout creationist literature --- cont
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance Try looking up "Modern Evolutionary Synthesis" genetics is a large part of the modern theories explaining HOW evolution works. A great deal works by genetic drift. If you are studying "genetics" and evolution isn't making sense then I'd have to question where you are getting your genetics. In Richard Dawkins' book "The Greatest Show on Earth" and Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" both cover these issues in great detail. TalkOrigins has every genetics claim you could cont --
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@JustinZimmer6 First of all just stop suggesting that I am a creationist because my arguments are some they have used themselves. My reason for disagreeing with evolution is for studying objective material about genetics and so forth, I like to learn. After reading this information I had began to question evolution as what I had learned did not seem to agree with my CURRENT knowledge about it, you should note that I initially did agree with evolution.>>continue.
SoulsResonance 5 days ago
@JustinZimmer6 I'm willing accept evolution, and will look up what you suggested, but what I have found out about it so far has not convinced me yet. I will admit that perhaps I shouldn't have had such an infallible tone in my first few post, but I simply just don't agree yet. What I have found so far is assumptions and theories that's not enough for me. I have no "religion" or faith I simply believe in the universe and nature I say this so you let go of your seeming polarized view of me.
SoulsResonance 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance I'm using the term "creationist" because the claims you were making, including calling evolution a "religion", and that there is no evidence for evolution among the specific claims are textbook creationist propaganda. If you are simply someone who stumbled upon one of these subversive sites, then I apologize for making that assumption based on the evidence I had.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance If you are a pantheist as you describe yourself, then you will want to understand evolution as best you can, as it is truly a means by which the universe comes to know itself. That evolution has occurred is incontrovertable, the evidence is plain to see. The theory is in how this evolution occured and it adjusts to new evidence and discovery. I would recommend "The Greatest Show on Earth" then first, it goes into the depths of possible abiogenesis and embryology.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@JustinZimmer6 During our little back and forth I have been looking through talkorigins(dot)org and I like it, it seems I'm finally going to settle my mind about this. What I don't understand about this whole "evos" v "creas" thing is why it even matters I'm only interested in the facts and science I assure you, and I do want to understand as best I can. I must say it seems am I under informed my understanding was based on dated info and claims about evolution. I have enjoyed our little spat
SoulsResonance 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance I'm glad to see you're on the right track. As far as the creationism vs evolution is concerned, it stems from a religious need to view the biblical creation myths as literal histories and reject the notion that humans are part of the animal kingdom. There are shades beyond this, but the core of the arguments is the same. Creationists feel that if evolution is true then Adam and Eve are false and so loosens the grip of original sin and therefore makes people immoral.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance In fact it is perceived that if we think we evolved from other animals that we would therefore act like animals. This also removes humankind's place as a special creation. This is repeated nearly as much as supposed refutations of evolution. What is frustrating to scientists is that these people try to force creationism into science by means of politics and deceit and often even misquote scientists for their agenda (and there is an agenda, I mentioned the Wedge Doc earlier)
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance Creationists seldom come up with new issues with evolution, rather they ignore rebuttals and simply repeat the same old straw men and repackage their mission to seem less "biblical" and therefore attract more people who frankly don't know any better. If what they were practicing was science they would come up with their own theory to explain the abundance of data; they don't. They just create distractions and try to seed doubt. It's a nuisance for those doing real science.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance It's sort of like what moon-landing denialists are to NASA. What is disturbing, especially given the religious nature of their base, is the amount of dishonesty used. It's not that creationists are necessarily stupid, but they employ many misleading tactics and outright lies to deliver their message. There is a lot of stupidity involved, but there are elements that will sneak in their message, whether through legislation or bogus review articles who's dishonesty is intentional.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance The evidence produces the data by which the theory is developed. Analyze the evidence presented, and judge for yourself if the theory matches the data. The idea, again, is not to believe in evolution, but to understand it. If you don't understand it, then you are simply agreeing with people who say it's true. And, that makes you succeptible to "alternative ideas" that sound sciency, but are really misdirections for laymen to meet an agenda. Look up the "wedge document".
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance Since you're not a creationist, don't be offended if you'll find the defense of your claims in the archive under "Index of Creationist Claims". YouTube doesn't let me post links, but you'll probably find yours under CB101.2. BTW, Darwinismrefuted(dot)com is an intelligent design site, which is merely a legally subversive form of creationism. I'm assuming that's where you got these "scientific" claims of yours, since you seem to be. Try looking at the full context of some of their
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance quotes, you might find them frighteningly deceptive. Try looking at the actual evidence. I've given you three sources, any one of which by themselves contains more information than every ID/Creationist site out there combined (from redundancy). Or swing by whyevolutionistrue(dot)com and read a little or engage in discussion. Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution. Life is an amazing phenonenon once you begin to understand how it works.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
@SoulsResonance what you won't find on any of these so-called "debunking" sites is an alternative explanation, at least one that doesn't begin with "In the beginning..." or involve boatloads of animals floating for a year without food or apparent predation and then somehow becoming distributed across several distant landmasses.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
Also please don't mistake me for a creationist, but I simply won't jump on this bandwagon until some more things are cleared up. Also the fact the this man is using that outdated, already ready proven wrong several times, and several years ago "evolution of the horse" chart as part of his "evidence" is just disreputable.
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
@SoulsResonance "proven wrong several times", please cite your sources. Then try actually reading the book "Why Evolution is True" rather than watching a video in search of evidence. For a non-creationist, you certainly employ their underhanded and poorly researched methods. Try TalkOrigins(dot)org, I'm sure you'll find that those things that seem to keep you off the "bandwagon" of science and reason will be cleared up quite nicely.
JustinZimmer6 5 days ago
New genetic information is needed to make one species into another and mutation does not or at least has not been proven to do this.A mutation almost always involves a loss of information or just a copy of information. They have never added new information to the genome, so it appears that they can never bring that genome added complexity. This contradicts evolution's saying that over time some organisms grew more complex and genomes changed This simply has not been demonstrated to be possible.
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
If anyone took out the time to study genetics they would quickly understand that evolution just isn't right. Evolution does not follow the laws of genetics as the say that through micro-evolution(which is really just variation and shouldn't even be called evolution), mutations occur over time creating new alleles, but that doesn't make since because this process only rearranges or deletes information ALREADY present>>> Continue
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
@SoulsResonance I meant "that doesn't make sense" not "since sorry about the typo.
SoulsResonance 6 days ago
All the evidence in the world will not convince creationists that evolution is true because it contradicts their faith. Reason vs Superstition ladies and gentlemen. I've decided to stop wasting my breath trying to speak reason to them because there is nooooo point
jbrizzle1234 1 week ago 7
Lol that was pathetic.
mamainmancj 1 week ago
Evolution isn't true lol. There's no real scientific proof just fairy tales that are worse then pagan myths. Anything to knock God out of the picture. Repent people you can run but you can't hide.
mamainmancj 1 week ago
@mamainmancj i know what u mean brother, these atheists are very silly
everyone should just repent and follow the one true god the flying spaghetti monster
i know i cant prove my beliefs with any sort of scientific or observation evidence
but just take my word for it k? im a pretty trustable guy
FarhanC99 1 week ago
@mamainmancj you can run but you cant hide ? Do you really think thats a message a loving god who created us would deliver ? I believe in "GOD" but my "God" is the universe, why cant we just give peace and love a chance ?
ZooYork258 1 week ago
@mamainmancj & also evolution is beautiful and true , read his book. peace.
ZooYork258 1 week ago 2
@mamainmancj your intelligence isnt true either. lol
ataryo 6 days ago
@mamainmancj "lol" isn't a rebuttal.
OccasionallyBearded 6 days ago
More pleaze
BarronGrimm 1 week ago
One more thing. i think Mother Earth Knew that there would one day in time be some corrupt selfish person or group of people who would try and use the knowledge of astrology/biology/evolution to their advantage as a tool to control future civilization. Therefore Mother earth prepared us(Atheist/Logical Thinkers) for this. She allowed Preservation so that Archaeologist can literally do there job and UNCOVER(dig up) THE TRUTH to the past Evolution Process and it's Existence..
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i can prove there's no god and that evolution is true.. go fuck your mom and/or sister. get her pregnant, see if the baby comes out deformed or with some type of mental illness. God fucked his Daughter had a Son named Jesus. and i guess Jesus came out normal. Adam and Eve were brother and sis. wait she was made from Adams rib. So basically Adam fucked himself and The process started . if that were the case everyone on earth is mentally ill. WAKE UP PEOPLE. EVOLUTION IS TRUTH! simplest form
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
i believe that we aren't the only thing(s) out there that Big Bang and evolution created. there's more. just the simple fact that we humans can't breathe outside of earth is enough evidence to show that we started on earth as micro organisms and that we've evolved for billions of years and adapted to this environment. there's no creator, that whole god created everything is just a control scheme. and people are so gullible. they actually believe that crap is true. fucking crazy world we live in.
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
There is no evidence of evolution and much less of abiogensis.
Objects did not make you what you are and they did not refine what you are.
The genome is the only thing that ever reorganizes the genome.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
@JungleJargon No evidence of evolution? That is quite a bold statement to be made since the whole lecture above is devoted to presenting scientific evidence for evolution. Did you even listen to it before you decided to comment?
ondrejfranek 2 weeks ago
@ondrejfranek Did you ever consider the issues?
You failed to respond to any of the issues I already presented.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Obvious troll is obvious.
LondonIrishRover 1 week ago
@LondonIrishRover See if you can address any of the issues I presented.
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@JungleJargon Sorry, I don't feed trolls. Try harder next time.
LondonIrishRover 1 week ago
Comment removed
JungleJargon 1 week ago
@LondonIrishRover So you admit you cannot prove that objects made or refined what you are, thank you!
JungleJargon 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LondonIrishRover You admit that you cannot disprove that objects did not make or refine what you are, thank you!
JungleJargon 1 week ago
Abortion takes real good care of the babies that are aborted, not!
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
Evolution is not basied on science to begin with.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
There is no evidence that anything other than the directives in the genome ever reorganize the genome.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
Fossils are evidence of the flood that buried them in over a mile of sediments.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
A lot of talk about things that prove nothing.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
Life at the bottom of the sea would of course would be found on the bottom.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
Don't even try to compare evolution with science.
The genome is the only thing that is able to reorganize the genome. Nothing else does.
...so there is no mechanism for evolution.
Variation does not equate to evolution.
Everything was buried in sediments deposited by the flood about 5,000 years ago.
JungleJargon 2 weeks ago
Those who deny Evolution can do so as they like. If they have offspring, they are actively participating in it whether they like it or not. I love the irony in this.
Mudflappus 2 weeks ago
The fact that there are people operating under sufficient delusion to add comment after comment (to the cumulative total of 3,700+) about some alleged private revelations to some 2,000 year old prehistoric figures is testimony to the need for them to get a real life rather than a born-again one---with all its supernaturally speculative childishness.
LAlba9 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9 BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-1. - The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true - "He hangs the earth on nothing."
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#68 There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#57 Our bodies are made from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7; 3:19). Scientists have discovered that the human body is comprised of some 28 base and trace elements - all of which are found in the earth
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9 -FOREKNOWLEDGE-#56 There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.#34 Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9 -BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#59 Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the "springs of the sea." Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9 BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE-#54 The Bible specifies the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel (Genesis 6:15). Ship builders today are well aware that the ideal dimension for ship stability is a length six times that of the width. Keep in mind, the bible ststed ideal dimensions for Noahs ark 4,500 years ago.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9.BIBLICAL SCIENCE FOREKNOWLEDGE# 1-66 - The earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). At a time when many thought the earth was flat, the Bible told us that the earth is spherical. BIBLICAL FOREKNOWLEDGE# 1-68 - Scripture assumes a revolving (spherical) earth (Luke 17:34-36). Jesus said that at His return some would be asleep at night while others would be working at day time activities in the field,a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night occurring simultaneously.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@LAlba9 biblical science foreknowledge # 44 - Ocean currents anticipated (Psalm 8:8). Three thousand years ago the Bible described the "paths of the seas." In the 19th century Matthew Maury - the father of oceanography - after reading Psalm 8, researched and discovered ocean currents that follow specific paths through the seas! Utilizing Maury's data, marine navigators have since reduced by many days the time required to traverse the seas.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
@MegaFloyd100
Good eisegetical scriptural references...keep up the good work...you ought to be able to prove that I'm a "Meat Popsicle" by spring...
LAlba9 2 weeks ago
MegaFloyd - There is NO satisfactory evidence of the "Noahic flood".
SirDainOfBramaged 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SirDainOfBramaged err?hello? ALL of the geological evidence supports it if you ignore the fraudulent dating methods! .Billion & billions of dead things rapidly fossilized[ by the entire herd!] fossils of shells etc on top of every mountain on earth,stratafication.We share the same evidence but i just choose NOT to interpret it via Methodological Naturalism.As any method of evidential interpretational presuppositions must assume the very point in dispute,its a faith choice for both parties.
MegaFloyd100 2 weeks ago
Birds that swim deep underwater, fish that fly, mammals that can only live in water.
You atheists got some work to do in explaining the whole "each animal is ideally suited to it's environment" assertion.
You can do that after explaining how evolution supports atheism instead of supporting how God designed life forms.
YoBravaFrumAnuvaMuva 2 weeks ago
@YoBravaFrumAnuvaMuva
Both silly and irrelevant. Silly because it's a real stretch to see this as descriptive rather than poetic or common understanding. Irrelevant because proving God exists and/or had a hand in creating the Bible doesn't prove that Genesis 1 should be taken so literally or that the Theory of Evolution is false.
pamcn123 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
since I am not able to post it just google Oxford atheist calls Richard Dawkins coward for not debating william lane craig
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
Origin of life? Finally, he admits he is stumped. Common ancestor because of Similar DNA? That is an assertion. God created life with similar DNA because if works. God can create life any way He wants to. If they cannot come up with a reasonable way that life began then to assume a common ancestor makes no sense.
jplogsdon 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jplogsdon " Origin of life? Finally, he admits he is stumped. Common ancestor because of Similar DNA? That is an assertion. God created life with similar DNA because if works. God can create life any way He wants to."
You just asserted that a god created life so how is that any different from your accusation of Dr Coynes? The reason why we share DNA with other creatures on our planet proves beyond a doubt that we all share a common ancestor.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@jplogsdon " God can create life any way He wants to."
Please provide evidence for this assertion.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
he is advocating killing unborn children. What a jerk. That is an atheist for you--no purpose in life. I suppose Hitler was not a bad guy since his behavior was just an evolutionary adaption.
jplogsdon 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jplogsdon " I suppose Hitler was not a bad guy since his behavior was just an evolutionary adaption"
What in Hitlers actions was an Evolutionary adaptation?
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn if we evolved then there is no objective morality. We are the product of our environment. We are what we are because of our surroundings. There is no free will, we act in a way that will help in our survival. If someone rapes a child he is just acting out his biological impulses.
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Your objection to Evolution is based on humans practicing morality? Culture is unique among our species and that is the primary reason that negates the more primitive urge to go around raping and slaughtering each other. There are ton of papers on cognitive Psychology that deals with the benefits of being nice to each other and human Intelligence would you like me to recommend a few papers for you to read?
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn I've already read a lot of books and papers on the subject--I am a scientist by the way. You mentioned Stephen Hawking and the big bang--how did the original particles begin--how did space itself and time begin? Would you like me to recommend a book for you to read?
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm What is your field in Science and what Grad school did you attend?
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn BS Chemistry, doctor of pharmacy, graduate courses in Chemistry and math--University of Illinois. I know basic evolution from the few courses I took and the books I read. I read 'From So Simple A Beginning' The Four Great Book of Charles Darwin' (The Voyage of the Beagle,On the origin of Species, The Descent of Man, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals). .
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm That's odd. And you still do not understand how Evolution works? I recommend the book " The Language of God " by Dr Francis Collins ' Evolutionist ' and a Christian and Also ' Just a Theory and Finding Darwin's God' both by Dr Kenneth Miller also a ' Evolutionist' and a Christian
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn I just noticed you had read Ehrman's books. I did too. I even mailed him questions and he responded right away. He lost the debate against William Lane Craig. On Bill Mahr and Jon Stewart he talked about how the bible verse, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not in the orig manusc. but we already know that, the bible even says that with a footnote, it was obvious that the audience never even read the bible.
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm William lane Craig as far I know, accepts Evolution by Natural Selection. I watched the debate between WLC and Ehrman an I came to a different conclusion. Ehrman's arguments were well constructed and logical. WLC's were not. Sorry but you not only claim that a god exists but he is also the Christian god. You have not demonstrated how this is possible.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
I did say over and over again but you are not willing to accept it. Re-read my posts. My belief in creation has nothing to do with the attributes of God or whether he is the Christian God. That is a separate issue.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
I'm not at all against teaching evolution in schools by the way. Children should be given all the data collected (fossil records, genetic info. etc.) and make up their own minds the conclusion. A teacher should not tell their students that the data shows there is no God (like what Coyne and others do).
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm " A teacher should not tell their students that the data shows there is no God (like what Coyne and others do)."
To my knowledge most science teachers are very professional and leave their personal beliefs out of their work. However I do know that most creationist science teachers love to assert their beliefs into the curriculum.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn not sure what school you went to but most science teachers do not bring up religion at all. They could get into trouble. Even the Christmas concerts are not allowed to mention Christ or God. The concerts are called "Festival of Lights" and just have generic songs without any reference to a God. Coyne's agenda is purely to spread atheism. His talks are sponsored by atheist organizations. He should focus on evolution and not worry so much about whether people are religious.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm " Even the Christmas concerts are not allowed to mention Christ or God."
Where did that come from? Rolol. You are jumping from topic to topic like a Table Tennis ball.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn you said science teachers bring up religion, my point is that they do not.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " you said science teachers bring up religion, my point is that they do not."
Er, ya they do, You ever been to the South? Tons of em talk about their religion in science class.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm " Coyne's agenda is purely to spread atheism. His talks are sponsored by atheist organizations. He should focus on evolution and not worry so much about whether people are religious."
Whats wrong with being an Atheist? And don't people have a right to talk about what they believe. I turn on the TV, on Sunday and nearly every other show on basic cable is a Religious show. I drive down the street I see churches signs saying something about your god.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn you can be an atheist but it is inappropriate to spread your religious beliefs to the class. Why can Coyne talk about atheism to high school classes but science teachers are not allowed to mention God.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " Why can Coyne talk about atheism to high school classes but science teachers are not allowed to mention God."
I have no idea what you are prattling on about. From the video Description it says that this was Sponsored by Atheist Alliance International 2009 conference. Not sure why you mention High schoolers. And why science teachers cant mention something about their religion? because it is science class. If you want to talk about religion do it in a humanities class.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
read coynes blog, he talks about visiting a high school and talks about atheism to the class.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Do you live close to DC. There is a Reason Rally on March 24th 2012. The there is an Atheist convention on the 25th I believe. It may be interesting for you.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn for some reason I am not allowed to post it but just google Jerry Coyne goes back to high school.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Nap time see ya mate.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm What is the Religious beliefs of an Atheist? Love to hear your version of this.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn you have faith that there is no God. That is your ultimate reality and how you base your life. Your pastor are people like Jerry Coyne, atheist websites, etc. To say there is no God is a knowledge statement, it means you know something to be true. It is also a faith statement. An agnostic simply says he doesn't know; that it could be true, there could be a God.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Faith : confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Faith: what scientists rely on to work out their tests, a form of hope that their work will bring fruition to their studies.
Faith: the bridge between science and religion.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists FAITH: confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn So number 2 would fit with science. See? Science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Since the colloquial usage of the word faith is varied. It is good to use the meaning of the word in a context.
There is no evidence for gods. That is why I do not believe in a god.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
you have faith there is no God. That is faith. Look up what faith means. You also live by your belief system and since you are here you get positive reinforcement from others of the same faith, which is a religious act. You are therefore, a religious person.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " You are therefore, a religious person."
So I kinda demonstrated my observation. It don't really care if you try and force equivocate the meaning of the word faith and then create a Post-Hoc fallacy that it makes me a religious person. If that some how satisfies you, then go buy yourself a cookie. but that unfortunately that does not make the equivocation true or logical. And we both know it.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " Your pastor are people like Jerry Coyne, atheist websites, etc"
I know that religious in-indoctrination plays a big part in pigeon holing the vocabulary of god worshipers. So it s not surprisings that you think Atheist-ism is a religion and that there are Atheist Pastors Etc. Because the vocabulary of the religious is conditioned in a very narrow and limited way. So it can be difficult for you to explain non-religious behavior in a non-religious way.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm What bothers you, in my opinion, is that more folks are becoming more secular, and leaving the religion of their parents. Religion had its run. In 50 years at least 60% of the U.S will be non-religious and that is a good thing.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn it is estimated that more than 90% in the US believe in God. It has gone down slightly over the years but then rose again after 9/11. In the 1960's during the Bealtles era belief also temporarily went down then shot up again in the 1970's. Why is it that an atheist has never be elected to public office? Right now almost all countries have the atheist rate at about 1% including the USA. Only a few have around 20% and one has 30%. Not good stats for you, so who is worried?
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Well of course god worshipers will always be more numerous than Atheists. The god Meme has been passing on from generation to generation for thousands of years. And the Meme has a huge head start and it had thousands of years to perfect its appeal. What I do know is that god worshipers are the ones who getting alarmed at the rate of secularism in the US. The meme will never be flushed out of our species but its effects are being curtailed.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@heymanhmm " Even the Christmas concerts are not allowed to mention Christ or God. The concerts are called "Festival of Lights" "
Didn't the early church ban Christmas celebrations because they believed it was of pagan origin. You do know that Jesus was not an American right. And was an Arab Jew from the middle East?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " My belief in creation has nothing to do with the attributes of God or whether he is the Christian God. That is a separate issue. "
Do you believe that the god that created the Universe is the Christian god?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn God isn't limited to one religion, one group, or one person; He is for everyone, but not everyone is for him.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Therefore since faith has a broad range of usage. It is better to use it within the context of the discussion. Now science can only be done using the scientific method. Having faith in the religious use of the word is not valid. Do you understand the difference or would you like me to re-post the definition of the word Faith once again?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Not really; science has to also be done with a certain amount of faith. You said it yourself in the second definition of faith. A theory is not based on proof, therefore it is a belief.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists I am not sure if you saw any of my previous comments. But as I stated early. The word faith cannot be pigeon holed in to JUST a religious context. I am afraid religious conditioning may play a part in this very restricted use of the word.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn I did't pigeon-hole the word "faith" to just religion; I said it is also used in science.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists For example Aristoltle believed Emprdocles theory that everything was made out of four elements earth, air, fire, and water. This was a simple enough but did not make any definite predictions. On the other hand Newton's theory of gravity was based on an even simpler model in which bodies attracted each with a force that was proportional to a quantity called their mass and invertible proportional to the square of the distance between them.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Yet this theory predicts the motions of the sun, the moon and the planets to a high degree of accuracy.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Now humans have 23 pairs of Chromosomes and chimpanzees have 24 pairs of Chromosomes. But how can that be since humans and Chimpanzees supposedly are related? Evolution predicted that some time in the past two chromosomes in the human linage must have fused together. Thus when we examined our DNA, scientists found that two chromosomes did indeed fuse together. Thus meeting the requirement for a good theory.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Sure, just like everything else related to humans. It's always "the chromosomes fused together", or "the deoxyribonucleic acids were more scrunched up here and here", or my personal favorite, "the bones look similar." I'm sorry, my friend, but it'll take more than that to convince me we're cousins of the apes.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " I'm sorry, my friend, but it'll take more than that to convince me we're cousins of the apes."
So how do you explain these observations that infer we are related to Chimpanzees. FYI Humans are classified as Great Apes.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Humans classified as Great Apes by...evolutionists? I don't recall me being classified as a great ape. A silly monkey in high school, maybe.
We're nothing like Chimpanzees. Just because our DNA's look similar doesn't mean we share a common ancestor. My DNA can look similar to my best friend's DNA, doesn't mean we share the same great-great-grandfather.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " My DNA can look similar to my best friend's DNA, doesn't mean we share the same great-great-grandfather."
ERVs can only be passed on to offspring. Humans sure several ERVs. Now the Kicker is that these ERVS are in the same LOCATIONS in our DNA.The Question is why would two species share the same ERVs at the same locations?. It is almost mathematical impossible for this to occur.The ERV's accrued at these locations in our DNA before we speciated.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn But we're not in the same location as chimpanzees, at least in the majority of the human population.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " But we're not in the same location as chimpanzees, at least in the majority of the human population."
ERV's are genetic markers that we can use to trace our genetic history.. As humans we acquired Certain ERVs after we speciated. That is why when we do a DNA test on babies it is simple to figure out who are its parents.You can also tell what family branch in the human tree are its ancestors. When we compare a Humans DNA and a Chimps. Some ERVs are VERY old.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " at least in the majority of the human population."
ERV's are lodged into our DNA at very specific locations when it is passed on, the ERV will be copied in the same DNA location. When two species have the same ERVs at the same locations that means that they shared an ancestor that passed on the copies to its offspring that later speciated. Do you understand?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " Humans classified as Great Apes by...evolutionists"
The person who classified humans as apes was in fact a christian who lived before the Publication of the Origin of Species.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn And before him?
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Before him what?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Before this Christian man who said evolution was happening, who else said that there was something "evolving" amongst animals? I know there were others before Darwin who thought something similar.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " I know there were others before Darwin who thought something similar."
Oh Ok.
Don't know how this is related to to anything but, OK.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Lamarck. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. He believed that mutations can happen during a lifetime, such as a giraffe stretching it's neck, and then passing that onto their children.
Tuggaro 2 weeks ago
@Tuggaro Wasn't there also a Greek scholar who said something like that?
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " We're nothing like Chimpanzees"
You mean we are more intelligent that Chimpanzees. That is because Evan though we are Genetically similar 6 millions years of Evolution separates us.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Sure, Evan says that. I don't say that.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists I recommend the book ' In search of Darwin's God" by Dr Ken Miller its pretty much available at most local libraries. He is a god worshiper like yourself but he is also an Evolutionary Biologist. You will find his explanation on the Evolution very interesting.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn I'm already reading "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe. If what I heard is true, then no amount of explanation for evolution will ever be enough.
True, it's just one book, that is also why I'm reading "Origins: Creation or Evolution" by Richard B. Bliss (please don't give me crap about the last name, it's been done).
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " I'm already reading "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe. If what I heard is true, then no amount of explanation for evolution will ever be enough."
Sigh... Michael Behe believes in Descent with Modification. In other words he accepts speciation The only argument he is making is that these changes were guided by an Intelligence. And not by Natural Selection. If you don't believe me why don't you E-Mail him. He answers public E-Mails.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn And what's wrong with being created through a superior intelligence? What's wrong with accepting that we humans don't know everything, but someone else does?
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " And what's wrong with being created through a superior intelligence?"
No one is saying it is wrong. What you have to do is provide evidence for this assertion.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists " What's wrong with accepting that we humans don't know everything, but someone else does?"
Isn't it strange that the 'person' always happens to be the religion that you were born into?
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Who said God was for one religion, or one group of people?
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Oh ya that's right Humans are special. We were created in the imagine of a god. That makes us different from all the other non-Human animals on our planet. We don't smell like animals, we don't have to eat like animals, we don't go to the bathroom like animals, we don't mate like animals, we don't give birth like animals, we don't behavior like other 'mere' animals. But we do look like gods don't we. Invisible, immortal, all powerful, sinless, ...Oh wait.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn Created in the image of God, not to look like God.
Kursinphists 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kursinphists " Created in the image of God, not to look like God."
You are begging the question. You have not demonstrated that a god exists. Let alone 'create'
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@Kursinphists Now that I have your attention. I will try to explain exactly what is a Scientific Theory. A theory is good is a good Theory if it satisfies two requirements. It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make a definite predictions about the results of future observations.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " how did the original particles begin--how did space itself and time begin? Would you like me to recommend a book for you to read?"
What is the name of the book.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn "Culture is unique among our species' is the best you can do?
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm Its very hard to you seriously, when you claim to be a scientist when you stone wall very logical arguments. Sorry but I don't believe you. All your rebuttals demonstrates this as well.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
@wowamonn why would I care if you believe me? You asked me a question and I gave you the answer.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
I don't ask you your education because it doesn't matter. There are very intelligent people on both sides of the issue. It only matters what you say not your credentials.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
btw, if I really wanted to lie about my credentials I would have said I have a degree in biology not just a few evolution courses. It makes no sense to mention Chemistry, math and pharmacy which are unrelated to evolution.
heymanhmm 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm" I would have said I have a degree in biology not just a few evolution courses"
Most creationist try to pass themselves off as 'Scientists". I debated with a guy 2 Months who claimed he worked at Harvard in the Life sciences College. Needless to say he did thought Evolution occurred as a serial! So ya, I have experience with folks who pretend to know something about science when in fact, they do not.
wowamonn 2 weeks ago
Bad design, vestigial organs, biogeography and other parts of his talk are purely assertions whether it is due to evolution or creation without any scientific studies to show that. It is his opinion that it is due to evolution. So why is he against religious or philosophical opinions based on personal experience. I could shake an empty bag all day and all night for as long as I want to and when I open the bag it will still be empty.
jplogsdon 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jplogsdon "Bad design, vestigial organs, biogeography and other parts of his talk are purely assertions whether it is due to evolution or creation without any scientific studies to show that"
Why would a god create Humans and Chimps with the gene to create Vitamin C and then switch it off using the SAME mutations? The answer is simple the Mutation occurred in the common ancestor of Humans and chimps and the mutations were passed on to both species during speciation.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn why are you so confident in that assertion? God can switch on and off genes all He wants to, what does that have to do with anything? If creation occurred a different way you would still be looking for ways to leave God out. The creation of the universe from nothing is amazing. The order, the beauty, the way all organisms work together, the way we feel when we learn from our mistakes, etc. all point to a creator. You can deny it but you will always be in the minority.
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm " why are you so confident in that assertion? God can switch on and off genes all He wants to, what does that have to do with anything?"
The point is this. Most plants and animals produce vitamin C. Molecular geneticists who examine DNA sequences from an evolutionary perspective confirmed that Humans have the gene encoding the enzyme protein known as L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase (GLO), which is required for synthesizing ascorbic acid.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn what does the ability to synthesize vitamin C have to do with anything? How is that adaptation suppose to benefit humans?
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heymanhmm Sigh... I am going to re-post a part of my previous comment to answer your question, cool?
" Presumably this occurred separately in primate ancestors whose natural diets were so rich in ascorbic acid that the absence of GLO enzyme activity was not a disadvantage — it did not cause selective pressure against the defective gene."
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@heymanhmm I will recommend the book 'A brief History of Time' by Stephen Hawking. It explains wonderfully the event of the Big Bang. And the world of quantum physics that explains Mathematically the functions of very small particles in our Universe. It is available at your local Library along with other fine books by Dr Laurence Kruss and Dr Neil DeGresse Tyson that will explain how our Universe works.
wowamonn 3 weeks ago
@wowamonn I took quantum mechanics in college. It does not explain how the universe began--Hawking is just putting his worldview into a theory to try to explain away God.
heymanhmm 3 weeks ago