Evolution and Creation

[Granite-M]

Man, and I thought I had it bad over in the Proposition 8 thread.

Good luck with all this, guys. Illegitimi non carborundum.

[gorthan313]

Originally Posted by Granite-M

Man, and I thought I had it bad over in the Proposition 8 thread.

Good luck with all this, guys. Illegitimi non carborundum.

I'm probably going to end up losing in the end......But I can at least know that I tried!

[ParaGoomba Slayer]

Originally Posted by gorthan313

Well, we all know that gravity is in existence, and actually happens. Give an example of Evolution in action.

I have a basic understanding of evolution, but here I go:

For example, I have an infection on my skin. I put anti-biotics on it. Most of the bacteria die off. But a lucky few MAY survive becuase they may have mutations that make them immune, and the survivors reproduce. Survival of the fittest, natural selection.

Originally Posted by Cavalier

The various strains of the influenza Virus (the Flu). These are some of the fastest mutating life forms on the planet. The mutate, or evolve, to survive in an environment that is extremely hostile to them. That is why every year, a modified Flu vaccine has to be developed and it only works on certain strains.

Damnit, Cav beat me.

[ABOMINATION]

Originally Posted by ABOMINATION

There are six things that everybody tries to answer
Cosmic Evolution-the origin of time, space, and matter
Chemical Evolution-the origin of higher elements from hydrogen
Stellar and Planetary evolution-origin of stars and planets. No one has ever seen a star form
Organic evolution-origin of Life
Macro-evolution-changing from one kind to another
Micro-evolution-variations within kinds. Only this has been observed.

I just want to say also, evolution, IMO, isn't a science, its a religion in itself. For the first five of the 'evolutions' above, they are purely religious. No one has ever seen any of those happen. The last one is the only one that has ever been observed. Stephen D. Schwartz cites 4 particular scientific discoveries that support the conclusion that God exists: the 2nd Las of Thermodynamics(stating that the universe is running out of usable energy and can't be really old), the impossibility of spantaneous generation of life from non-life (verified by Pasteur over 150 yrs ago), genetic information theory (which postulates tat specified complexity, like that found in DNA, comes from a mind, neer by chance), and the Anthropic Principle (that the universe as well as planet earth are specifically "fine tuned" to accomodate life).
Seriously, when you look out into the skies at night and see the stars, can you really think that all this happen by chance?

[Lord Pyre]

I didn't read much of the topic, but I'll say this:


It's a theory. There's very little proof that it's there. Some people believe it's true, others do not. I've read science books where the author is irritated that so many people and schools refer to it as a fact, when nothing is science can really be proven.

It's actually very much like a religion; not much actual proof, just belief.

Take that how you will. Just a few extra thoughts.

[hexplex?]

Originally Posted by gorthan313

God's design is always evolving through microevolution. Not through macroevolution. If all life forms evolved from one source, then, wouldn't the source contain all of that DNA? And, i know that the giraffe got the neck, but, why didn't the giraffe get flying, and something else get the long neck?

Wow, now that would be a truly amazing design. Perhaps multiple source amoebas developing around the same billion years, could be a theory to explore.

Recent fossil evidence from China proves that flying started from the trees down and not from the ground up (saw it on NOVA so it must be true.) A large, herbivore with heavy bones is simply not a candidate for flying. The long neck is the simplest solution to it's challenges, and that is evolution.

[Nukatha]

Originally Posted by gorthan313

If it did, then, why didn't the giraffe gain the ability to fly? Or why didn't the elephant get the ability to swim?

If a giraffe had move 8 and flying, along with a range of 2 from its neck, it it would be horrible for balance. Something that can move that fast and hit with a pseudo range attack is just too awesome.

The elephant has 6 move, trample stomp, and carry. I'll be the first to say that trample stomp doesn't really make sense when you are in the water. Plus its a tank with its defense and life. Giving it the ability to move through water without stopping just makes it too unbalanced.

[Lord Pyre]

Originally Posted by Nukatha

If a giraffe had move 8 and flying, along with a range of 2 from its neck, it it would be horrible for balance. Something that can move that fast and hit with a pseudo rang attack is just too awesome.

The elephant has 6 move, trample stomp, and carry. I'll be the first to say that trample stomp doesn't really make sense when you are in the water. Plus its a tank as it is. Giving it the ability to move through water without stopping just makes it too unbalanced.

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

[Nukatha]

I can wait. Its the thought that counts!

[vdemman13]

Originally Posted by ABOMINATION

I've been studying about the universe, and I've got a few questions concerning evolution. #1 is: the Big Bang. Most scientists say that roughly 4.1 billion yrs. ago, the world was formed. I've got a lot of trouble believing what the evolutionists teach. They say that billions of years ago, there was nothing. And a small dot began sucking in all of nothing, and it kept on sucking in nothing until it was full. Then it started twirling around very fast, for millions of years. And eventually FWOOSH, it exploded and became galaxies and planets and stars and everything we see today. One problem is, how do they know this? Second is, if the Big Bang is spinning clockwise, then explodes, shouldn't everything in the universe be spinning clockwise as well? Its called the Conservation of Angular Momentum. But there are 3 planets, Uranus, Venus, and Earth that are spinning counterclockwise, while the rest are spinning clockwise. Of the 91 known moons, 8 of them are spinning backwards.
</IMG>I've got more questions, but for now I want some opinions.
Oh, and about that dot and nothing, here's a quote from Discovery Magazine, April, 2002: The universe burst into something from absolutely nothing-zip, nada. And as it got bigger, it became filled with even more stuff that came from nowhere.

Greetings, my friend -

These are the arguments that have done away with Philosophical Naturalism/ Macro Evolution. The case is closed and your faith is secure in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ: "I am the first and the last."

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']1. [/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman','serif']The Law of Cause and Effect.[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] The Effect has to have a Cause equal to or great than itself. Nothing cannot cause the Universe. Nothingness, non-living, chance/randomness cannot cause matter, life, consciousness, [/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] and order. If nothingness is the effect of the universe, then it flies against the laws of cause and effect. And if Nothingness created the universe, then it would aslo contradict the First [/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] Law of Thermdynamics.[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']2. [/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman','serif']The First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy Conservation. [/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. This claims that we cannot get something from nothing. Nothing comes from nothing.[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']3. [/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman','serif']The Second Law of Thermodynamics: Entropy.[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] Things go from order to disorder or from hot to cold [loss of energy]. The universe is slowly dying from heat loss. If, as some claim, that the universe is enternal, then we would have [/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] died of heat loss an infinite number of years ago. The concludes that the universe, though large beyond human comprehension, is not infinite. Philosophical naturalistic Macro-evolution [/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] claims that things go from disorder to order, which is a contradiction of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Entropy: Order to Disorder.[/FONT]

[gorthan313]

It always frustrates me when people talk about infamous events caused by Christians, but they neglect to mention several infamous people who's actions were spawned by their belief in Evolution! The people that I am referring to are: Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Josef Stalin, and Adolf Hitler. All four of these men acted upon their Evolutionary beliefs.

[johnny139]

Originally Posted by Lord Pyre

I didn't read much of the topic, but I'll say this:


It's a theory. There's very little proof that it's there. Some people believe it's true, others do not. I've read science books where the author is irritated that so many people and schools refer to it as a fact, when nothing is science can really be proven.

It's actually very much like a religion; not much actual proof, just belief.

Take that how you will. Just a few extra thoughts.

Quite the contrary - the single thing that differentiates science from religion is the fact it CAN be proven. Has evolution been proven? I wouldn't say so. But that's not to say it can't be. It may take thousands upon thousands of years of recordings, but concrete proof, if evolution is, in fact, valid, will be found.

The same cannot be said of religion. God can never be proven - there will never be concrete proof either way. If God could be, than he/she/it wouldn't be a religious figure, he/she/it would be a historic one.

...as for the Big Bang, I'm don't claim to have enough expirience to say whether or not it could be proven at some day.

Originally Posted by gorthan313

It always frustrates me when people talk about infamous events caused by Christians, but they neglect to mention several infamous people who's actions were spawned by their belief in Evolution! The people that I am referring to are: Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Josef Stalin, and Adolf Hitler. All four of these men acted upon their Evolutionary beliefs.

That was belief in SOCIAL Darwinism, something that Charles Darwin actively condemned, if I'm not mistaken... and it's not much different than "my religion is better than your religion" if I may be so bold.

Oh dear, I'm getting into a serious debate, aren't I? Off to look at pictures of LOLCATS, before I get too deep...