PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     questions to darwinists

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
SJChaput

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The thing that bothers me about creationsists is that they seem to think that by disproving evolution it somehow proves that creationsim is correct. However this is not true as anyone can see, after all there are thoughsands of other cultures with as many beliefs in a genesis to contend with who have as much proof that their story is valid as christianity does.

I am sure it has been mentioned many times but how do you all accont for dinosaurs and their existance millions of years before man?

How can you argue the science of evolution when there is not a single thread of information to back up creationsim, not ONE, ever.

The idea that we were created in a big bang at least has some scholarly merit instead of believing in a fairy tale with no facts or any thought to back up that belief
 


Posts: 32 | Posted: 07:28 AM on January 20, 2005 | IP
Yod Heh Vav Heh

|      |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from whytry at 01:09 AM on January 20, 2005 :
To Yod Heh Vav Heh:

It doesn't matter what message board we are posting on, the same issues get brought up. I see no need to continue on both. One should do.

The basis issue is this:

1) you see similarity of organisms as proofs of evolution. I do not: I see them as the part of the observations initially made that led to the theory of common descent being postulated.


There isn't anything OTHER than common descent that accounts for genetic similarity, physical similarity is a vaguer connection and should rely on biogeography also. There's no way you can logically dismiss the genetic evidence as anything other than a chronicle of common descent.

2) you see long periods of time as an elixir to the proposed mechanism's ills. I do not.


Long periods of time or sudden (geologically) changes in selective pressures are accounted for with the mechanism, far from a magic elixir, it's the only answer that makes sense and is self sufficient. There are no ills with the mechanism, not till an unevolvable organism is found, anyway, or till organisms completely contradictory to the genetic and fossil evidence turns up somewhere, for instance a highly specialised placental mammal appearing in the fossil record before multicellular life was found, that had something hidden in it that altered our knowledge of genetics to a massive extent.

3) you hope and pray that minor stochastic changes in the genome are sufficent to bring about the MAJOR changes that must have occurred to have such a spectacular array of creatures. I do not.


Why not? You've not actually proposed a reason of how it could be wrong, or given examples of any organisms it doesn't account for, or given a mechanism that explains everything evolution does and explains why evolution is wrong and looks so right simultaneously.

I don't see much movement from either side.

Just so you know, I have enjoyed your posts regardless of our disagreements and I hope my words haven't been overly caustic.  


Don't worry about it.


-------
Vengeance is mine.
 


Posts: 22 | Posted: 4:18 PM on January 20, 2005 | IP
pasha

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Reading this post, I have noticed a recurring themes and I would like to adress them.
First of all evolution is happenign every singe day, even as you sit in your chair right now. Many people ask 'if evolution is true then why isn't it happening today?"
One example is of Thomas Hunt Morgan's fruit flies, in 1909 he had only one species of fruit flies the "wild type"(all had red eyes) which showed no variants in it and after isolating a  population of the wild type and breeding them for a year he found one variant, a fruit fly with white eyes. after a short time period he found other mutations(SLIGHLY different from other fruit flies, genetically), 85 mutations to be more precice, and the genes of these fruit flies were passed from generation to generation(they will alway exist and may or may not be expressed in their children). Mutations are occurences that happen in nature and over a long period of time give rise to new species.  To put it in simpler and more coherent words, " The demonstration of a spontaneous, inheritable alteration in a gene had consequences far beyond the study of drosphilia(fruit fly) genetics. It suggested a mechanism for the origin of VARIATION that exists within POPULATIONS(such as humans, mice, flies, bacteria and even viruses)--evidence for a vital link in the theory of evolution. If VARIANTS of genes could arise spontaneously, then isolated populations could become GENETICALLY DIFFERENT from one another und ULTIMATELY(SOmetimes in millions of years) give rise to new species."(Cell and Molecular Biology. Gerald Karp. Fourth Edition)
Fruit flies mature in 10 days(to a sexually mature adult)and a fruit fly can produce 1000 eggs withing a lifetime, thats why, with such a population that lives, breeds and dies so quickly, variations can be followed VERY precisely(in the example a bove it took one year to find 85 mutations). Ladies and gentleman, in the following sentce I present to you evolution in all its glory: If enough of these mutations happen within a fruit fly population you can produce a new strain of fruit flies(that look different) that won't even be able to breed and produce offspring with the original fruit flies(wild type) but only with the new strain! Hence, a NEW SPECIES now exists. For mammals such as apes or whales etc. such changes are not as obvious(because we live on average 70-100 years and  produce a few offspring compared to fruit flies!) and the most remarkable or striking evidence of  change come from skeletons of early humans or for early whales(check out the evolution line for whales, its pretty amazing to know what anymal they evolved from).
By the way, fruit fly reaserch is IMMENSE today compared to 1909 and so is reaserch on other animals, so check out some papers or articles online about evolution in progress, evolution is a lot more complex than what I have explained here, I just gave you a run down of the basics. If you are wondering yes, there is an explenation of how and why mutations occur, but understanding these explenation will mean taking university biology, genetics and chemistry courses.

If you want an up to date example of evolution happening everyday(other than some guys' fruit flies in 1909) then let me tell you, it would be impossible to keep AIDS patiens alive today without knowing the theory of evolution. AIDS patients take alot of drugs wich help kill the AIDS virus, but the virus keeps adapting to drugs and ultimately becomes resistant to it, how? The virus EVOLVES!!! Lets say there is a certain virus living in your body, most of the viruses that are in your body are identical copies of one another and a few mutations(variations) of the same virus exist within that population. One drug may kill off a large population of the virus that exists in your body but might not kill, lets say 1%, of of the HIV virus. This 1% is resistand to a certain drug and thus replicates numerously and once again causes infection now we have a new population of the the HIV virus, but its resistand to one type of drug(and genetically different) so you can't use it anymore. If you try another drug, the same thing will happen, a small percentage of varients will survive and give rise to a new, drug resistand virus.

    Some people believe that evolution dictates superiority and inferiority different creatures. That is not true, according to evolution a human being is no more up the ladder than an elephant or a kangaroo, all three of these species are equally complex(biologically). The only thing that seperates us is that we are probably one of of the few species that can interact with each other, we have complex brain(allowing language, which gives us an advantage over other animals) and modify matter around us(Me..made...FIRE!)and we have a complex social structure. All in all, we are still animals, like it or not, you gotta eat, sleep, when its a hot day you will sweat, you have red blood running through your veins(hopefully) like other mammals and most importanly most of us will pass on our genes to propagate the human race, no matter what.

Evolution is also about natural selection, Hypothetically: If the earth was scorched today and if the seas would boil(for some reason), 99.999 percent of creatures would die, including all people, the only things left alive would be thermophiles(heat loving bacteria) and the would "win" the race to survival because they would survive to pass on their genes whereas the rest of us would be floating dust.  The modern evolutionary theory is complex, very complex and its based on facts, it is something that you have to study in University before you can comprehend(high school stuff, barely SCRATHCES the surface and in my opinion its inadequalety taught in the class room, it should be taught more coherently so that student can understand what it is) you cant pass judgement on it based on preconceptions, modern medicine wouldn't be where it is today and ironically, without the theory of evolution most of you(I am sure) wouldn't be here debating!



(Edited by pasha 3/28/2005 at 4:43 PM).
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 3:44 PM on March 28, 2005 | IP
C_Darwin_rulz

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Sakata at 9:01 PM on October 11, 2002 :
Eminent British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle reminds us of the well-known mathematical fact that "even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup" the chance of producing the basic enzymes of life by random processes without intelligent direction would be approximately one in 10 with 40,000 zeros after it.  In other words, it couldnt happen--ever!  Says Hoyle, "Darwinian evolution is most unlikely to get even one polypeptide [sequence] right, let alone the thousands on which living cells depend for survival."  Why then is this completely impossible theory still honored? Hoyle accuses the evolutionists of defending a religious faith:

 "The situation [mathematical impossibility] is well known to geneticists and yet nobody seems to blow the whistle decisively on the theory...
   Most scientists still cling to Darwinism because of its grip on the educational system....You either have to believe the concepts, or you will be branded a heretic."



THAT IS SOOO FALSE. The universe is big. Really big. I mean, you think it's a long walk down the road to the chemists, but that's just peanuts to space! (Thanks to Douglass Adams). But honestly, since the universe is infinite, than the fact that something is physicaly possible, no matter how unlikely, automaticly makes it so. you see, Infinity means "never ending." If you actually had any idea how tiny you are in comparison to the universe, your brain would explode. That turns your probability from 1 in 1.0 X 10 to the 40,000th power into 1 in 1. The problem with your statistic, of course, is that it assumes a limited universe. Infinity cancels it out.


-------
Evolution is a theory, not a hypothosis. That means there is a **** of a lot of evidence.
 


Posts: 4 | Posted: 11:55 PM on April 10, 2005 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.