Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Evil-ution
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cotjones" data-source="post: 7665686" data-attributes="member: 573988"><p>Again stating that the goal is proving or disproving evolution, not it's dichotomy with the Bible. That said, you are arguing multiple different things. Complexity is a human concept. Extremely complex things happen in nature all the time with no intervention. Evolution provides the explanation for such events. You look at the end product to describe the thing, scientists look at the entire process to describe the thing. This provides no evidence against evolution.</p><p></p><p>Actually there are plenty of "Transitional" species. The fact is that Evolution suggests that the time it took to move from marsupials to placental mammals was on the order of 30 million years. This is a TINY change that took FARRRRR longer than language using humans have been around for. In the mean time in the last 100 years there have been all sorts of examples of organs developing outside the body and other bizarre things such as babies developing outside the womb. You really think its that much of a stretch to think the transition to placental birth couldn't happen in 30 million years? On the other hand, you claim speciation is impossible, yet we've accomplished it in labs. Then you claim that it's possible, but just not from category to category (IE: cat to fish or so on.) No one claims a fish spontaneously gave birth to a squirrel. But if you ask me this looks a HECK of a lot like a transitional species your book here claims doesn't exist: <img src="http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/images/smilodectes.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, this entire thing is false. The Bible does directly contradict science all over the place. IE:</p><p></p><p>29 Who can understand how he spreads out the clouds,</p><p></p><p>how he thunders from his pavilion?</p><p></p><p>30 See how he scatters his lightning about him,</p><p></p><p>bathing the depths of the sea.</p><p></p><p>31 This is the way he governs[d] the nations</p><p></p><p>and provides food in abundance.</p><p></p><p>32 He fills his hands with lightning</p><p></p><p>and commands it to strike its mark.</p><p></p><p>The fact that the earth was (according to the bible) formed before the sun moon and stars contradicts science. Again this does nothing to disprove EVolution</p><p></p><p>Actually this is exactly what is expected. MOST things don't get fossilized. Mass extinction events, quickly flooding and area, or covering things in ash catalyze fossilization. Darwin was looking for Acquired characteristics. He was looking for a blend of species, not accurate to what we know of the development of species. Most speciation begins with one or 2 huge changes that adapt the organism to a new niche (ergo: a squirrel-like mammal gaining opposable thumbs.) This development changes the appropriate ecology niche so that it is different from squirrels, thus the squirrel's other characteristics change quickly. Many times too quickly to have a suitable fossil record millions of years later. Keep in mind 99% of species that have ever existed are extinct.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cotjones, post: 7665686, member: 573988"] Again stating that the goal is proving or disproving evolution, not it's dichotomy with the Bible. That said, you are arguing multiple different things. Complexity is a human concept. Extremely complex things happen in nature all the time with no intervention. Evolution provides the explanation for such events. You look at the end product to describe the thing, scientists look at the entire process to describe the thing. This provides no evidence against evolution. Actually there are plenty of "Transitional" species. The fact is that Evolution suggests that the time it took to move from marsupials to placental mammals was on the order of 30 million years. This is a TINY change that took FARRRRR longer than language using humans have been around for. In the mean time in the last 100 years there have been all sorts of examples of organs developing outside the body and other bizarre things such as babies developing outside the womb. You really think its that much of a stretch to think the transition to placental birth couldn't happen in 30 million years? On the other hand, you claim speciation is impossible, yet we've accomplished it in labs. Then you claim that it's possible, but just not from category to category (IE: cat to fish or so on.) No one claims a fish spontaneously gave birth to a squirrel. But if you ask me this looks a HECK of a lot like a transitional species your book here claims doesn't exist: [IMG]http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/images/smilodectes.gif[/IMG] Actually, this entire thing is false. The Bible does directly contradict science all over the place. IE: 29 Who can understand how he spreads out the clouds, how he thunders from his pavilion? 30 See how he scatters his lightning about him, bathing the depths of the sea. 31 This is the way he governs[d] the nations and provides food in abundance. 32 He fills his hands with lightning and commands it to strike its mark. The fact that the earth was (according to the bible) formed before the sun moon and stars contradicts science. Again this does nothing to disprove EVolution Actually this is exactly what is expected. MOST things don't get fossilized. Mass extinction events, quickly flooding and area, or covering things in ash catalyze fossilization. Darwin was looking for Acquired characteristics. He was looking for a blend of species, not accurate to what we know of the development of species. Most speciation begins with one or 2 huge changes that adapt the organism to a new niche (ergo: a squirrel-like mammal gaining opposable thumbs.) This development changes the appropriate ecology niche so that it is different from squirrels, thus the squirrel's other characteristics change quickly. Many times too quickly to have a suitable fossil record millions of years later. Keep in mind 99% of species that have ever existed are extinct. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Evil-ution
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
