Print

[bertfallen]

bertfallen

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created the first humans named Adam and Eve.

The only reason I doubt that to be true, will be because techincally we would all be family, if thats true, didn't god have a problem with incest?

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

it's actually not "fundamentalist Christians" that opposed Darwinism 150 years ago: it was paleantologists-- as they still do

Lie. Paleontologists were the ones who assembeled the geologic column, which shows the gradual development of organisms.

I just have three words for you: the Cambrian period.  Not good enough?  Still skeptical as to the "fossils" that for some reason "didn't form"?  Well, Chinese scientists have found the pre-Cambrian period.  And in fact their bodies WERE soft, and still formed into fossils!

When did anyone claim that the soft bodied fossils didn't form during the cambrian? It would contradict the "Cambrian Explosion" idea. (keep in mind that there wasn't a large amount of fossils found in the cambrian, the words 'cambrian explosion' are in comparrison with the amount of fossils found in the pre-cambrian. The fossil record for both of these periods are largely incomplete)

So we have no "missing link" that's been found (that hasn't been an un-clever hoax), so we haven't seen species evolve into another species NOT EVEN ONCE in the fossil records

Another lie.

Behe's book (which did nothing more than state what an intelligent person ought to already realize)

Behe and intelligent used in the same sentence? Roffle.

that if you're an evolutionist and haven't addressed the points in this book (and by addressing: I don't mean by debunking Behe by calling him a "fundamentalist Christian), then you have one huge problem.

All the points have been adressed, intellegent design is a fraud.

He addresses the complexity of an eye, and how impossible it would be for those hundreds of working parts to have been carried over year, by year, by year until it became a full blown out, working eye

Dan-Erik Nilsson and Susanne Pelger calculated that if each step were a 1 percent change, the evolution of the eye would take 1,829 steps, which could happen in 364,000 generations.

So where did the light sensative cells come from?  Random mutation? 

Correct.

But you realize that in order to interprete these signals (assuming you believe in the circular statment of "survival of the fittest"), you'd need a nervous system and... a brain!

and you realize that these light sensitive cells probably first appeared in simple organisms that had a nervous system, right?

If it was only a light sensitive cell, they wouldn't need a brain; there are planarian flatworms that use light sensitive cells and they don't have brains.

also, how is survival of the fittest circular?

Then we have survival of the fittest working against all of this, and even if evolution "were a fact" (as natural selection is), it would take far more than trillions of years for all of this to happen "randomly" (as Darwin's entire theory relies off of).

Where are you getting these numbers, besides pulling them out of your ass?

How does survival of the fittest work against it?

So there's no real reason to believe the actual process

If you like to ignore evidence.

(and we're getting more and more evidence against it as time goes on

Creationist lie.

and we've had more than 150 years... still no evidence in the fossil records

There is evidence in the fossil records.

loads of evidence against it because of the Cambrian and pre-Cambrian fossil records

how do the Pre-cambrian and Cambrian fossil records work against it?

and you don't expect me to believe that all creatures who might give evidence toward evolution for some reason didn't form as fossils?

Yes, because fossilization itself is not a particularly common event. It requires conditions that preserve the fossil before it becomes scavenged or decayed. Such conditions are common only in a very few habitats, such as river deltas, peat bogs, and tar pits. Organisms that do not live in or near these habitats will be preserved only rarely.

But the argument from evolutionists is: "it's possible, you can't say it's possible".  150 years, and more evidence against than for? 

Again, false. It's the other way around; there is more evidence for it than against.

If that wasn't enough, you'll note that Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe (who were athiests... not "Christian fundamentalists") were in the same boat as Behe in stating the obvious.

Anyhow,

Hoyle ran the numbers to determine the mathematical probability of the basic enzymes of life arising by random processes.  They concluded that the odds were 1 to 1 followed by 40,000 zeros.

And there you have it: evolutionism.

You forgot the part where all of Hoyle's calculations were debunked by biologists as a straw-man.

[lalanoodle]

lalanoodle

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

I don't think anything about where or how Humans came to be are proven.
There are no "facts" or evidence, we are created, popped out of nowere or evolved from an acestor.
Everything is possible, although they are all theories.
Theory -

An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

Everything is possible thats why different people assume based on information and some facts about the past (Ancestor, evolution).

SSBB FC: 4639-8685-4595

[2awesome4apossum]

2awesome4apossum

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Lie. Paleontologists were the ones who assembeled the geologic column, which shows the gradual development of organisms.

Oh, I'm not saying that all paleontologists are against it... much like many Christians believe in evolution.  I'm just saying that Darwin's first opponents were paleontologists (not fundamentalist Christians), and that many of his opponents still today are in fact paleontologists.

When did anyone claim that the soft bodied fossils didn't form during the cambrian?

No, no, no.  The argument is that the fossils providing a link from one species to another may not have fossilized because of having soft bodies or other bogus claims.  This is one of the many things that the Cambrian explosion proved: that it's really stupid to say that links between the missing species simply never "fossilized".

Another lie.

Do you know how to say anything else but "lie"?  I'm surprised you haven't debunked me already by calling me a creationist.  Unfortunately I actually address issues and give reasoning behind my statements.  Seems you're not as good as it as I am.  (Unless I'm expected to believe that "Another" is what you're using as backing for the word "lie" in which case: my bad.)

Behe and intelligent used in the same sentence? Roffle.

Point taken.  You're not capable of debunking his claims either.  Point for possum!

All the points have been adressed, intellegent design is a fraud.

Clearly.  I'm so glad you've given me reasoning behind your thinking.  After all, we wouldn't want ZFGC to think that you're a Darwinist who relies on propaganda and the word "lie" to prove his point!

Dan-Erik Nilsson and Susanne Pelger calculated that if each step were a 1 percent change, the evolution of the eye would take 1,829 steps, which could happen in 364,000 generations.

That is: assuming that each step was a 1 percent change.  Although if it happened completely randomly, as Darwinism said, and "survival of the fittest" says that it's very unlikely for it to be that quickly, and unlikely for it to happen at all.

and you realize that these light sensitive cells probably first appeared in simple organisms that had a nervous system, right?

If it was only a light sensitive cell, they wouldn't need a brain; there are planarian flatworms that use light sensitive cells and they don't have brains.

And so this: by chance... evolved into an eye?  Awesome!

also, how is survival of the fittest circular?

Who survives?  The fittest!
Who are the fittest?  The ones who survive!

Where are you getting these numbers

I'm pulling them out of my ass.

besides pulling them out of your ass?

Nowhere, really.

How does survival of the fittest work against it?

Because how could all of the parts to an eye randomly form... and why would "survival of the fittest" say that ones with random parts of an eye survive?

If you like to ignore evidence.

I love to.  That's why I use it to back up my statement, although you don't yourself.

Creationist lie.

There we go!  Don't worry!  I understand-- no reasoning needed.  I'm officially debunked by being called a "creationist".  At this point you win the debate.

There is evidence in the fossil records.

O RLY?

how do the Pre-cambrian and Cambrian fossil records work against it?

Because it shows simply the sudden "popping up" of new creatures with no real evidence of evolution.  The Cambrian explosion implies that they suddenly just "showed up".  The pre-Cambrian record expounds on that.

Yes, because fossilization itself is not a particularly common event. It requires conditions that preserve the fossil before it becomes scavenged or decayed. Such conditions are common only in a very few habitats, such as river deltas, peat bogs, and tar pits. Organisms that do not live in or near these habitats will be preserved only rarely.

And so you're expecting me to believe that the only fossil ever found as a transitionary species is that feathered dinosaur (which actually couldn't fly, and there's no reason to believe that the wings somehow helped the creature out-- it's probably simply a species of it's own), because fossils are "rare"?

Awesome!

Again, false. It's the other way around; there is more evidence for it than against.

You'll have to call me a creationist before winning this point.

You forgot the part where all of Hoyle's calculations were debunked by biologists as a straw-man.

How so?  Please: explain.  Give me reasoning.

So apart from fulfilling the stereotype of the argument a Darwinist might give (you darn creationist!), I'm not exactly sure what you proved.

[Moon_child]

Moon_child

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Boys and Girls before you go to bed I have a fairytale to tell.

1 day there was a Big Bang created from nothing and viola everything we know was created then!
and thats the end of the fairytale Boys and girls sleep well and keep dreaming.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Boys and Girls before you go to bed I have a fairytale to tell.

1 day there was a Big Bang created from nothing and viola everything we know was created then!
and thats the end of the fairytale Boys and girls sleep well and keep dreaming.

The big bang theory does not state that everything came from nothing; it states that everything existed within a very small amount of space, and then expanded very quickly.

However, what does the bible state? That God created everything ex nihilio (from nothing)? Sounds like the same thing you said (which is obviously false)... but with some all-powerful being waving a magic wang (or do I mean wand? )

[LuigiBro]

LuigiBro

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

The big bang theory does not state that everything came from nothing; it states that everything existed within a very small amount of space, and then expanded very quickly.

However, what does the bible state? That God created everything ex nihilio (from nothing)? Sounds like the same thing you said (which is obviously false)... but with some all-powerful being waving a magic wang (or do I mean wand? )

What he said, the Big Bang supposedly started when all the matter of...everything violently exploded after being contained in a very small volume.  The universe is still expanding until it stops and startscontracting.  We'd know when this happens (if it'd happen) when the red/blue shift thing switches.  This is supposed to end at the "Big Crunch" when everything is contained in a small volume again.  Then we're where we began.

That's what I remember from something I read...

Too bad I'm really off-topic.

"May the innovation be with you."

www.guffa.smf4free.com

[2awesome4apossum]

2awesome4apossum

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

However, what does the bible state? That God created everything ex nihilio (from nothing)?

Nope.  It just says He created the world, us, the plants, animals, etc.  It never speaks of Him creating something such as, say... matter.

The Bible doesn't support ideas such as wand-waving magic, or magic at all.  Rather: miracles.  Anyhow, just because the Bible doesn't give us specifics doesn't mean it never happened.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

However, what does the bible state? That God created everything ex nihilio (from nothing)?

Nope.  It just says He created the world, us, the plants, animals, etc.  It never speaks of Him creating something such as, say... matter.

From what? Where was it? Where did it come from?

For that matter: How did he do it? Where did he come from? What gives him the power to do it?

The Bible doesn't support ideas such as wand-waving magic, or magic at all.  Rather: miracles.  Anyhow, just because the Bible doesn't give us specifics doesn't mean it never happened.

Miracles, magic... different words, same meaning.

At any rate, as far as science is concerned, there is no evidence, whatsoever, for creationism, while evolution does have significant evidence in favour of.

[2awesome4apossum]

2awesome4apossum

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

From what? Where was it? Where did it come from?

Remember: I believe that matter never had a beginning, never will have an ending.

For that matter: How did he do it? Where did he come from? What gives him the power to do it?

Well, it's called the power of priesthood which is founded on the laws of science.  Albeit, we can't possibly know as much about science as God, so we wouldn't know how or what it's inclusive of what He can or can't do.

Miracles, magic... different words, same meaning.

No, because miracles usually can be explained by scientific phenomenon.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

From what? Where was it? Where did it come from?

Remember: I believe that matter never had a beginning, never will have an ending.

Which is supported by science, fair enough. But that isn't what most people interpret the bible as saying.

For that matter: How did he do it? Where did he come from? What gives him the power to do it?

Well, it's called the power of priesthood which is founded on the laws of science.  Albeit, we can't possibly know as much about science as God, so we wouldn't know how or what it's inclusive of what He can or can't do.

It sounds like an easy loophole to explain away all the inconsistencies. "We can't know how he does it, because he knows everything, and therefore knows all the things we can't know, e.g. how he did it". To this, I ask how did he know how to do this in the first place?

In the end, the only answer you're really giving is "Because he's god and he's all-powerful and all-wonderful", to which the reply is... "Why? How do you know this?"... to which you answer that, in truth, you don't really, but you believe it. I believe the world is a pile of snot, waiting to be cleaned up by a hankerchief (Douglas Adams FTW!). Does this make it correct? No. Same as your explaination; without any kind of evidence, all you have is hearsay - everything you believe is because someone told it to you. In a court of law, this would be dismissed. You'd probably get upset if I asked that you don't use any such things that could be labelled hearsay, but whatever...

Miracles, magic... different words, same meaning.

No, because miracles usually can be explained by scientific phenomenon.

So can magic. Except, in magic, the phenomena are called "sleeves".

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Boys and Girls before you go to bed I have a fairytale to tell.

1 day there was a Big Bang created from nothing and viola everything we know was created then!
and thats the end of the fairytale Boys and girls sleep well and keep dreaming.

I also have a fairy tale to tell.

One day a big man in the sky used his powers of miracles and created the world. Then he did a little dance and adam and eve popped up out of the ground like flowers. Then they all danced and ate the forbidden fruit and got kicked out of the garden of eden. The end.

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Oh, I'm not saying that all paleontologists are against it... much like many Christians believe in evolution.  I'm just saying that Darwin's first opponents were paleontologists (not fundamentalist Christians), and that many of his opponents still today are in fact paleontologists.

Which Paleontologists, persay? Young earth creationists and IDers?

No, no, no.  The argument is that the fossils providing a link from one species to another may not have fossilized because of having soft bodies or other bogus claims.  This is one of the many things that the Cambrian explosion proved: that it's really stupid to say that links between the missing species simply never "fossilized".

That's an explanation on why fossils are so rare. We've already found transitional fossils.

Do you know how to say anything else but "lie"?  I'm surprised you haven't debunked me already by calling me a creationist.  Unfortunately I actually address issues and give reasoning behind my statements.  Seems you're not as good as it as I am.  (Unless I'm expected to believe that "Another" is what you're using as backing for the word "lie" in which case: my bad.)

So you're going to ignore the cases where new plant species evolved through polyploidy, and the new species of mosquito, the molestus?

Point taken.  You're not capable of debunking his claims either.  Point for possum!

How does his mousetrap analogy work when he doesn't even go by the rules of evolution, which require mutation, reproduction, and a population?

And so this: by chance... evolved into an eye?  Awesome!

Yeah, isn't it great?

Who survives?  The fittest!
Who are the fittest?  The ones who survive!

"Survival of the fittest" intends to be a short version of the statement "those who are best at surviving and reproducing will have higher fitness" and this is not a circular statement since the sentence indicates that fitness is the consequence of one's ability to tackle life challenges." - Wikipedia

I'm pulling them out of my ass.

That must hurt.

Nowhere, really.

Oh, I see.

Because how could all of the parts to an eye randomly form...

Mutation.

and why would "survival of the fittest" say that ones with random parts of an eye survive?

Because the random parts would allow them to evade predators, or give them the advantage over their population that do not have that particular mutation. (note that an incomplete system can still be used; simple light sensitive cells can be used to find food, if most of that organism's food source is in a sunny area.)

There we go!  Don't worry!  I understand-- no reasoning needed.  I'm officially debunked by being called a "creationist".  At this point you win the debate.

Let's just ignore the fact that evolution is one of the most widely supported theory of biologists, and supported by fossil evidence, genetics, comparitive anatomy, etc.

Most of the things 'wrong' with evolution are mostly misconceptions, or straw men.

O RLY?

YA RLY.

Because it shows simply the sudden "popping up" of new creatures with no real evidence of evolution.

It simply shows that many more species evolved between the precambrian period and the cambrian period...

The Cambrian explosion implies that they suddenly just "showed up".  The pre-Cambrian record expounds on that.

No it doesn't... gaps in fossils don't indicate that the organisms just 'showed up'..

And so you're expecting me to believe that the only fossil ever found as a transitionary species is that feathered dinosaur (which actually couldn't fly, and there's no reason to believe that the wings somehow helped the creature out-- it's probably simply a species of it's own), because fossils are "rare"?

Are you caught in the 18th century? there's way more transitional fossils than just archaeopteryx.

also, Archaeopteryx could fly.  http://tinyurl.com/rpdcm

You'll have to call me a creationist before winning this point.

Why do I need to do that when I'm telling the truth?


Why can't this be debated in the evolution topic?

[Kren]

Kren

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created Adam and Eva, they reproduced and we existed <.< simple as that,

[MG-Zero]

MG-Zero

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created Adam and Eva, they reproduced and we existed <.< simple as that,

It's not just that simple though.  Just think about it for a second: 2 people have 2 kids.  A boy and a girl...they can't do much about mating as the kids will be retarded.

I'm not saying that the Adam and Eve story isn't true...it just couldn't be that simple.

i love big weenies and i cannot lie

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created Adam and Eva, they reproduced and we existed <.< simple as that,

It's not just that simple though.  Just think about it for a second: 2 people have 2 kids.  A boy and a girl...they can't do much about mating as the kids will be retarded.

I'm not saying that the Adam and Eve story isn't true...it just couldn't be that simple.

Obviously God gave Adam and steve "special or magical" genes that would make incest not cause retarded children.

[tippz]

tippz

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created Adam and Eva, they reproduced and we existed <.< simple as that,

It's not just that simple though.  Just think about it for a second: 2 people have 2 kids.  A boy and a girl...they can't do much about mating as the kids will be retarded.

I'm not saying that the Adam and Eve story isn't true...it just couldn't be that simple.

Incest does not automatically create birth defects, it just increases the chances.

Not defending the story as a theory as I don't take every word in the bible literally, just saying it isn't always a fair arguement...

[Moon_child]

Moon_child

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Boys and Girls before you go to bed I have a fairytale to tell.

1 day there was a Big Bang created from nothing and viola everything we know was created then!
and thats the end of the fairytale Boys and girls sleep well and keep dreaming.

I also have a fairy tale to tell.

One day a big man in the sky used his powers of miracles and created the world. Then he did a little dance and adam and eve popped up out of the ground like flowers. Then they all danced and ate the forbidden fruit and got kicked out of the garden of eden. The end.

What you call a fairy tale ain't a fairy tale mine is yours not.

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

Boys and Girls before you go to bed I have a fairytale to tell.

1 day there was a Big Bang created from nothing and viola everything we know was created then!
and thats the end of the fairytale Boys and girls sleep well and keep dreaming.

I also have a fairy tale to tell.

One day a big man in the sky used his powers of miracles and created the world. Then he did a little dance and adam and eve popped up out of the ground like flowers. Then they all danced and ate the forbidden fruit and got kicked out of the garden of eden. The end.

What you call a fairy tale ain't a fairy tale mine is yours not.

The basis for you call fact is hearsay; someone told it to you, you read it somewhere, blah blah. No evidence exists for it anywhere.

[lalanoodle]

lalanoodle

Re: Humans, where did we come from?

God created Adam and Eva, they reproduced and we existed <.< simple as that,

It's not just that simple though.  Just think about it for a second: 2 people have 2 kids.  A boy and a girl...they can't do much about mating as the kids will be retarded.

I'm not saying that the Adam and Eve story isn't true...it just couldn't be that simple.

There was angels (Not like shiny people with wings) that were on earth, and also mated with people on the earth -> Produced giants or people that are bigger. Meaning, they also reproduced with others outside the family.

SSBB FC: 4639-8685-4595