Evolution is Fact

[loco]

Darwin's Intelligent Design

[OTHstrong]

Evolution is a game among scientes and their ego, when we are kids we say" my dad can beat up your dad" The evolutionist ego goes like this..... person A, see this rock its ten thousand years old.
                person B, well my rock is 100 thousand years old.
                Person A, darn it I have to beat him, what should I do, runs to the back yard and pick up a rock, ya this will do.
                Person A, breakthrouh, my rock is one million years old.
                etc. etc. etc
                    etc, etc, etc,

Finally        person B, my rock is 50 million years old
                Person A, my rock is 100 million years old.
                 etc, etc.

In my whole life I've always read 65 million years for dinos. 65 million consistantly in every book evEry tv show, the other day for the first time I saw a show that said 65.5 million years old, I said to my self, wow, it got 500 000 years older since I was kid, the fact is the numbers keep growing and it doesn't matter the number they tag on things because no one questions them.

WHAT AN INCREDIBLE THEORY

[Deicide]

Evolution is a game among scientes and their ego, when we are kids we say" my dad can beat up your dad" The evolutionist ego goes like this..... person A, see this rock its ten thousand years old.
                person B, well my rock is 100 thousand years old.
                Person A, darn it I have to beat him, what should I do, runs to the back yard and pick up a rock, ya this will do.
                Person A, breakthrouh, my rock is one million years old.
                etc. etc. etc
                    etc, etc, etc,

Finally        person B, my rock is 50 million years old
                Person A, my rock is 100 million years old.
                 etc, etc.

In my whole life I've always read 65 million years for dinos. 65 million consistantly in every book evEry tv show, the other day for the first time I saw a show that said 65.5 million years old, I said to my self, wow, it got 500 000 years older since I was kid, the fact is the numbers keep growing and it doesn't matter the number they tag on things because no one questions them.

WHAT AN INCREDIBLE THEORY

Just stick to what you know: juicing.

[dantelis]

Evolution is a game among scientes and their ego, when we are kids we say" my dad can beat up your dad" The evolutionist ego goes like this..... person A, see this rock its ten thousand years old.
                person B, well my rock is 100 thousand years old.
                Person A, darn it I have to beat him, what should I do, runs to the back yard and pick up a rock, ya this will do.
                Person A, breakthrouh, my rock is one million years old.
                etc. etc. etc
                    etc, etc, etc,

Finally        person B, my rock is 50 million years old
                Person A, my rock is 100 million years old.
                 etc, etc.

In my whole life I've always read 65 million years for dinos. 65 million consistantly in every book evEry tv show, the other day for the first time I saw a show that said 65.5 million years old, I said to my self, wow, it got 500 000 years older since I was kid, the fact is the numbers keep growing and it doesn't matter the number they tag on things because no one questions them.

WHAT AN INCREDIBLE THEORY

Because it is science and new investigation continues to go on with new tools, new theories and facts come up. 

Unlike religion, where facts and investigation have no bearing at all and nut jobs religious leaders like Falwell and Robertson proclaim things like, "God spoke to me and said that he would take me up if you don't donate money to my school" or ""If you go all the way back to the days just following creation, men lived nine hundred years or more."  (Talk about pulling a number out of your ass.)

[Nordic Superman]

Evolution is a game among scientes and their ego, when we are kids we say" my dad can beat up your dad" The evolutionist ego goes like this..... person A, see this rock its ten thousand years old.
                person B, well my rock is 100 thousand years old.
                Person A, darn it I have to beat him, what should I do, runs to the back yard and pick up a rock, ya this will do.
                Person A, breakthrouh, my rock is one million years old.
                etc. etc. etc
                    etc, etc, etc,

Finally        person B, my rock is 50 million years old
                Person A, my rock is 100 million years old.
                 etc, etc.

In my whole life I've always read 65 million years for dinos. 65 million consistantly in every book evEry tv show, the other day for the first time I saw a show that said 65.5 million years old, I said to my self, wow, it got 500 000 years older since I was kid, the fact is the numbers keep growing and it doesn't matter the number they tag on things because no one questions them.

WHAT AN INCREDIBLE THEORY

This is an incredibly stupid post

Such ignorance to scientific method and technology.

Hasn't the interpretation of the Bible changed over the years? Which interpretation is correct? Yours or someone from 500 years ago?

[OTHstrong]

This is an incredibly stupid post

Such ignorance to scientific method and technology.

Hasn't the interpretation of the Bible changed over the years? Which interpretation is correct? Yours or someone from 500 years ago?

You guys are the ignorant ones bringing this to the religious boards like its suppose to be a slap in the face, your evolution is not only stupid and non-ligic to me but to millions of others so when a large enough group believes in something its hardly ignorant, but you make fun of our opinion when I think evolution doesn't have a shred of observable evidance. It ain't personal, just accept the fact that you believe in evolution by faith only, no different then believing in God by faith, if you call your dating methods proof then we will call are Bible proof because of the witnesses in them and not to mention that over a million words with hundreds of authors without one mistake, lack of measurments or condradiction, BTW the dead sea scrolls date back way further then 500 years and they have the same data to the last word the same as the source of scriptures we have been reading for the last few centuries. And your right it was a stupid post, but it got my point across, call me all the names you want but evolution isn't created by solid evidance, only perpectives from individuals who choose to see things in a way that their imaginations carry them.

[egj13]

" to suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."  Charles Darwin



The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to BASIC questions.  Some well meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man's questions about the universe.  Evolution is not a good theory-it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.  Here are some BASIC questions for you evolutionists. 


1.  Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia)

2.  When, where WHY and how did life come from dead matter?

3.  When, where WHY and how did life learn to reproduce?

4.  Why would any plant/animal want to reproduce since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease chances of survival. In other words, does the individual have the drive to survive or the species and either way how was this drive learned?

5.  Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a commmon creator instead of a common ancestor?

6.  When, where, WHY and how did:
     a.  single celled plants become multicelled plants?  Where are the two and three celled intermediates?

     b.  Single celled animals evolve?

     c. fish change to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, reptiles to birds?  (the lungs, bones, eyes,
        reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering etc.. are all very different) how
        did the intermediates survive?

7.  which of these things evolved first and how long did it work without the others?

     a.  The digestive system? the food to be digested? the appetite? the ability to find and eat food? the
          digestive juices or the bodies resistance to it's own digestive juices?

     b.  The drive to reproduce or the ability too?

     c.  The lungs?  the mucus lining to protect them?  the perfect mix of gasses to be breathed in?

     d.  DNA?  or the RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?

     e.  The immune system? or the need for it. 

when you can answer some of these basic questions then and only then can evolution and more specifically the absense of an intelligent creator be given credibility. 


 

[Alex23]

[Deicide]

" to suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."  Charles Darwin



The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to BASIC questions.  Some well meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man's questions about the universe.  Evolution is not a good theory-it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.  Here are some BASIC questions for you evolutionists. 


1.  Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia)

2.  When, where WHY and how did life come from dead matter?

3.  When, where WHY and how did life learn to reproduce?

4.  Why would any plant/animal want to reproduce since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease chances of survival. In other words, does the individual have the drive to survive or the species and either way how was this drive learned?

5.  Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a commmon creator instead of a common ancestor?

6.  When, where, WHY and how did:
     a.  single celled plants become multicelled plants?  Where are the two and three celled intermediates?

     b.  Single celled animals evolve?

     c. fish change to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, reptiles to birds?  (the lungs, bones, eyes,
        reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering etc.. are all very different) how
        did the intermediates survive?

7.  which of these things evolved first and how long did it work without the others?

     a.  The digestive system? the food to be digested? the appetite? the ability to find and eat food? the
          digestive juices or the bodies resistance to it's own digestive juices?

     b.  The drive to reproduce or the ability too?

     c.  The lungs?  the mucus lining to protect them?  the perfect mix of gasses to be breathed in?

     d.  DNA?  or the RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?

     e.  The immune system? or the need for it. 

when you can answer some of these basic questions then and only then can evolution and more specifically the absense of an intelligent creator be given credibility. 


 

The immune system, the eye, DNA, all of this has been explained in uncountable numbers of papers and books by professional scientists. You can go read one if you like.

Additionally 'why' questions are almost always invented and lack any real substance; humans have a tendency to attribute motive and reason to the natural universe where there is neither nor.

[Nordic Superman]

You guys are the ignorant ones bringing this to the religious boards like its suppose to be a slap in the face, your evolution is not only stupid and non-ligic to me but to millions of others so when a large enough group believes in something its hardly ignorant, but you make fun of our opinion when I think evolution doesn't have a shred of observable evidance. It ain't personal, just accept the fact that you believe in evolution by faith only, no different then believing in God by faith, if you call your dating methods proof then we will call are Bible proof because of the witnesses in them and not to mention that over a million words with hundreds of authors without one mistake, lack of measurments or condradiction, BTW the dead sea scrolls date back way further then 500 years and they have the same data to the last word the same as the source of scriptures we have been reading for the last few centuries. And your right it was a stupid post, but it got my point across, call me all the names you want but evolution isn't created by solid evidance, only perpectives from individuals who choose to see things in a way that their imaginations carry them.

" to suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."  Charles Darwin



The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to BASIC questions.  Some well meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man's questions about the universe.  Evolution is not a good theory-it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.  Here are some BASIC questions for you evolutionists. 


1.  Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia)

2.  When, where WHY and how did life come from dead matter?

3.  When, where WHY and how did life learn to reproduce?

4.  Why would any plant/animal want to reproduce since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease chances of survival. In other words, does the individual have the drive to survive or the species and either way how was this drive learned?

5.  Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a commmon creator instead of a common ancestor?

6.  When, where, WHY and how did:
     a.  single celled plants become multicelled plants?  Where are the two and three celled intermediates?

     b.  Single celled animals evolve?

     c. fish change to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, reptiles to birds?  (the lungs, bones, eyes,
        reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering etc.. are all very different) how
        did the intermediates survive?

7.  which of these things evolved first and how long did it work without the others?

     a.  The digestive system? the food to be digested? the appetite? the ability to find and eat food? the
          digestive juices or the bodies resistance to it's own digestive juices?

     b.  The drive to reproduce or the ability too?

     c.  The lungs?  the mucus lining to protect them?  the perfect mix of gasses to be breathed in?

     d.  DNA?  or the RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?

     e.  The immune system? or the need for it. 

when you can answer some of these basic questions then and only then can evolution and more specifically the absense of an intelligent creator be given credibility. 

Evolution, is a fact. Evolution is NOT a theory, it is a process best explained by Darwin's THEORY of natural selection.

Nice one for taking Darwin's quote out of context, I will now supply the full quote:

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

1. Nothing to do with Evolution, that's a question of physics.

2. I've tried to explain that here.

3. / 4. It didn't "learn" to reproduce. In the very early primitive lifeforms some organisms interacted in a way which would produce sexual reproduction (via natural selection). These organisms survived because reproduction has many biological benefits. The main benefit is that reproduction allows variation which creates genetic diversity which can lead to advantages in natural selection over asexual organisms. It wasn't learned.

5. Ridiculous. Genetic evidence alone is enough to prove evolution is indeed fact.

6. a. b. c. Evolution has occurred over half a billion years. The amount of possible generations during that amount of time with very slight variations is immense. The changes are so subtle in each generation they appear not to exist.

7. The answers to most of these is that they gradually evolved simultaneously.

You do realize however that the consistency of the air has changed on Earth over time? During the dinosaurs years there was much more free oxygen in the air which allowed organisms to be huge, not only the dinosaurs themselves, but huge foot long dragon flies etc.

Remember: evolution is a fact (no matter what you say), natural selection is Darwin's theory explaining the process of evolution.

[Deicide]

Evolution, is a fact. Evolution is NOT a theory, it is a process best explained by Darwin's THEORY of natural selection.

Nice one for taking Darwin's quote out of context, I will now supply the full quote:

1. Nothing to do with Evolution, that's a question of physics.

2. I've tried to explain that here.

3. / 4. It didn't "learn" to reproduce. In the very early primitive lifeforms some organisms interacted in a way which would produce sexual reproduction (via natural selection). These organisms survived because reproduction has many biological benefits. The main benefit is that reproduction allows variation which creates genetic diversity which can lead to advantages in natural selection over asexual organisms. It wasn't learned.

5. Ridiculous. Genetic evidence alone is enough to prove evolution is indeed fact.

6. a. b. c. Evolution has occurred over half a billion years. The amount of possible generations during that amount of time with very slight variations is immense. The changes are so subtle in each generation they appear not to exist.

7. The answers to most of these is that they gradually evolved simultaneously.

You do realize however that the consistency of the air has changed on Earth over time? During the dinosaurs years there was much more free oxygen in the air which allowed organisms to be huge, not only the dinosaurs themselves, but huge foot long dragon flies etc.

Remember: evolution is a fact (no matter what you say), natural selection is Darwin's theory explaining the process of evolution.

You are quite well informed for a businessy kind of guy; very impressive.

[Nordic Superman]

You are quite well informed for a businessy kind of guy; very impressive.

Learning about evolution etc. is way more enjoying than my work (I did love programming at one point, but I've hit a mega-plateau), so I have to say it's easy to learn this stuff when you enjoy doing it.

[Deicide]

Learning about evolution etc. is way more enjoying than my work (I did love programming at one point, but I've hit a mega-plateau), so I have to say it's easy to learn this stuff when you enjoy doing it.

You're still so young; go into another, more interesting field.

[Nordic Superman]

You're still so young; go into another, more interesting field.

Yeah, I think it's looking that I will be forced (thank Wotan, I'm not very proactive at the moment) due to financial restraints.

Social economic evolution in progress I suppose

[loco]

Yeah, I think it's looking that I will be forced (thank Wotan, I'm not very proactive at the moment) due to financial restraints.

Social economic evolution in progress I suppose

Become NordicSuperman++       

[Nordic Superman]

Become NordicSuperman++       

lol very smart

[NeoSeminole]

prove it- that's how i handle it.  I have a book from the God who says he created us.  But i guess that's not good enough for some people.

done!

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc

I've never heard the term The "fact" of evolution. There never has, no will there ever be, a overall consensus from science on evolution.

Evolution is both fact and theory. In science, fact and theory are 2 different things. A theory does not become fact after enough evidence comes forth. Rather, scientific theories are models/ explanations used to describe natural phenomena based on the facts we have.

Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. The theory of evolution explains the mechanism of this phenomenon.

[NeoSeminole]

Does evolution explain how man came into being? Or are these two different subjects?  (I am going somewhere with this.)

You're thinking of abiogenesis. It is a separate branch of science from evolution. Abiogenesis seeks to explain the origin of life whereas evolution deals with what happened after life originated.

[NeoSeminole]

According to these scientists, how did the first life appear?

Scientists believe the earliest signs of life appeared 600 million years after the earth formed. These life forms were possibly derived from self-reproducing RNA molecules. The replication of these organisms required resources which soon became limited, resulting in natural selection. DNA molecules then took over as the main replicators. They began to develop inside enclosed membranes which provided a stable environment for replication: proto-cells. 100 million years passed before cells resembling prokaryotes appeared. These organisms were chemoautotrophs. Another 900 million years passed before photosynthesizing cyanobacteria evolved which produced oxygen. The oxygen concentration in the atmosphere subsequently rised. Eventually, more complex cells began to appear: the eukaryotes. After 2 billion years, the first multicellular organisms evolved. Natural selection fueled the evolutionary radiation that occured during the last 1 billion years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_evolution

[NeoSeminole]

Where did the super nova come from? You can only explain your belief system in how things evolve. You can't explain how they came to be.

The prevailing theory is that quantum fluctuations in the vacuum of space were pulled far apart during the Big Bang. Normally these fluctuations result in pairs of virtual particles that come into existence briefly and then annihilate each other. However, the rapid expansion of the universe during the Big Bang separated these particle pairs before they had time to couple thus making them 'real.' The particles created by quantum fluctuations have the ability to become either matter or energy.

American Scientist (peer reviewed journal)
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/observing-the-beginning-of-time

Matter and energy were interchangeable during the earliest moments after the Big Bang. Colliding photons formed particle-pairs, and matter/anti-matter annihilation created photons. The very instant these photons were created, they immediately converted into matter and vice versa. It wasn't until 10^-12 sec. after the Big Bang that quarks and electrons were able to exist separate from photons.

http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/InTheBeginning.html

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/early.html

As space expanded, it began to cool down. The universe entered the nucleosynthesis epoch during which the first hydrogen atoms began to form. However, the distribution of hydrogen gas in the universe was not homogenous. Over time, regions of higher density collapsed and coalesced due to gravitational forces. These clouds of collapsing interstellar hydrogen were so massive that the gravitational forces at the center caused the atoms to ignite in a process called fusion. Thus the first stars in our universe were born.

http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_center/cosmic_evolution/docs/fr_1/fr_1_stel.html

Your above explanations are only speculation. You don't know any of that to be fact and you can't prove it. There are some interesting cases that can make the evolution theory seem attractive but when you can't explain how that first life came to be with absolute certainty, your whole entire belief crumbles.

There is such as thing as proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If we follow your logic, then a large percentage of criminals - murderers, thieves, rapists, etc - should be let free since we cannot know with absolute certainty if they are guilty.

[NeoSeminole]

You guys are the ignorant ones bringing this to the religious boards like its suppose to be a slap in the face, your evolution is not only stupid and non-ligic to me but to millions of others so when a large enough group believes in something its hardly ignorant

argumentum ad populum

"a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it."

but you make fun of our opinion when I think evolution doesn't have a shred of observable evidance.

oh no?

It ain't personal, just accept the fact that you believe in evolution by faith only, no different then believing in God by faith, if you call your dating methods proof then we will call are Bible proof because of the witnesses in them and not to mention that over a million words with hundreds of authors without one mistake, lack of measurments or condradiction, BTW the dead sea scrolls date back way further then 500 years and they have the same data to the last word the same as the source of scriptures we have been reading for the last few centuries. And your right it was a stupid post, but it got my point across, call me all the names you want but evolution isn't created by solid evidance, only perpectives from individuals who choose to see things in a way that their imaginations carry them.

Your analogy is flawed. Science is built upon facts while religion necessitates faith in the absence of facts. There is a wealth of evidence that supports evolution. Evolutionists use the fossil record, stratigraphy, radiometric dating, embryology, comparative homology, and molecular biology to study evolution. Each of these fields of science arrived at the same conclusion independently of each other. The law uses a similar process called forensics to piece together events that occurred in a crime.

[Deicide]

Good job NeoSeminole. Hopefully it will keep the fundies from acting up again.

[big L dawg]

prove it- that's how i handle it.  I have a book from the God who says he created us.  But i guess that's not good enough for some people.

I've never heard the term The "fact" of evolution.
There never has, no will there ever be, a overall consensus from science on evolution.

don't believe everything that you read.

[Lord Humungous]

Evolution in a species I totally buy- a bird growing a longer bill because the inscets it hunts have been driven deeper into the trunk of a tree because of climate changes over a period of time. On this basis I totally agree evolution is a fact. As far as a one celled animal becomming a human over millions of years, it never happened and was never and will never be proven- fact

[NeoSeminole]

Evolution in a species I totally buy- a bird growing a longer bill because the inscets it hunts have been driven deeper into the trunk of a tree because of climate changes over a period of time. On this basis I totally agree evolution is a fact. As far as a one celled animal becomming a human over millions of years, it never happened and was never and will never be proven- fact

thank you for that brilliant rebuttal complete with sources to back up your claim.