Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 123
  1. #31
    Your ad here for $5 Loregoreth's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    278
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert
    You do know what a half life is? Its when matter decays. This process is how we can do things like carbon dating, as carbon-14 has a relativty short half life, which we can measure to find out the date of old things.
    Yea, I guess I should have brushed up on my half-life knowledge...

    You do realize that new species don't necesarily kill off what came before them? Homo sapiens outcompeted their immediate predecessors, but monkeys and apes are still around.
    Case and Point. If apes, which supposedly predate human, are still around why are the Transitional species between the apes and Humans not alive? If the Transitional species are suppose to be advance through natural selection then they should have survived longer than apes. Unless you think that the ape to human transition took only one generation.



    That image tries to depict the Ape to Human transitional. However, Between the Homo-Erectus and Homo-Sapien we find fossilized remains of humans between 13 and 30 feet tall. Can Evolution explain why the caveman grew suddenly immensely large then shrunk to 6 feet?

    The bone found, next to a ~ six foot man:


    Seriously, trying to pass off evolution as bunk by attacking it's weaker points is childish.
    Says the people that call opposing theories, Religion based, Biased, Unscientific, Fanatical group of Loonies.

    So what if there isn't archaelogical evidence sufficient to explain the ENTIRE biological history. Is there sufficient evidence to catalog all human history? What, there isn't a complete unbroken record? But that's much simpler, should I therefore infer that no humans lived in these gaps?
    Transitions supposedly took 50 - 90 million years. So how is it possible we find 1, if lucky, in a course of approx. 70 million years. And if we find a transitional fossil it usually is out of place, like the giant humans between Homo-Erectus and Homo-Sapien. Still Evolution is taught as fact in many schools.
    Quote of the Month:
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaMoFoThief View Post
    how do you do the angled "+"

  2. #32
    DragonSoul ChojiroShintaro's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    South East England
    Posts
    490
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Loregoreth View Post
    Case and Point. If apes, which supposedly predate human, are still around why are the Transitional species between the apes and Humans not alive? If the Transitional species are suppose to be advance through natural selection then they should have survived longer than apes. Unless you think that the ape to human transition took only one generation.
    Good point. Perhaps it was impossible for the transition species to stay in their state without evolving. God knows why, maybe it was just like that, it's perfectly possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loregoreth View Post
    Transitions supposedly took 50 - 90 million years. So how is it possible we find 1, if lucky, in a course of approx. 70 million years. And if we find a transitional fossil it usually is out of place, like the giant humans between Homo-Erectus and Homo-Sapien. Still Evolution is taught as fact in many schools.
    Evolution is not necessarily always over a long period of time. You may be suprised. Certain important evolution processes can take short periods of time. Remember there are other factors which come into play with evolution.

  3. #33
    Your ad here for $5 Loregoreth's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    278
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by ChojiroShintaro View Post
    Evolution is not necessarily always over a long period of time. You may be suprised. Certain important evolution processes can take short periods of time. Remember there are other factors which come into play with evolution.
    I was referring to the major transitions, e.g. fish to amphibian, amphibian to reptile, reptile to mammal, reptile to bird.
    Quote of the Month:
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaMoFoThief View Post
    how do you do the angled "+"

  4. #34
    Browncoat Robert's Avatar

    Rank
    Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,946
    Likes (Received)
    902

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Are you saying we evolved from apes?

    We did not, it was actualy a tree shrew type animal. Both apes and humans evolved from this, about 5-8 million years ago in the pliocene era. The tree shrew like animal evolved from a hedge hog and that from a starfish.

    We know this happened by looking at the genomes of humans and chimpanzees, they finaly separated 5.4million years ago.


    Again please do research before you try to make points...

  5. #35
    Your ad here for $5 Loregoreth's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    278
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Well, I guess you can say the same for blue birds evolving from amoebas and grizzly bears from fish. I was talking about the immediate supposed ancestors of Homo sapien. According to the theory of evolution, as of 2006, these are the ancestors of Humans.

    Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis -> missing link
    missing link -> Homo ergaster
    Homo ergaster -> missing link (possibly more than one)
    missing link -> Homo heidelbergensis
    Homo heidelbergensis -> missing link
    missing link -> Homo sapien

    Please note that as of 2006 evolutionists DO NOT KNOW which family was the ancestor of the Homo Family, though some speculate, with out much evidence, that the ancestorial family is the Australopithecus family, but that is just pure speculation.

    And, IMO, these species look ape enough for me to consider them monkeys, though I suppose the correct technical term would be hominiods(sp?)
    Last edited by Loregoreth; 06-03-07 at 03:23 AM.
    Quote of the Month:
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaMoFoThief View Post
    how do you do the angled "+"

  6. #36
    Browncoat Robert's Avatar

    Rank
    Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,946
    Likes (Received)
    902

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    So...

    The fact there are a few missing links between species, you are totaly disputing the fact it could have happened? Surely a before, most of the middle and an after is good enough?

    I dont understand how you can put so much faith into a god with litterly NO proof, when there is already most of the proof being shown to you.

    As i said, we didnt really evolve from apes, we seperated 5.4 million years ago from them.

    Ohh and please dont call them evolutionists, they are called Biologists...

  7. #37
    Your ad here for $5 Loregoreth's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    278
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    The fact there are a few missing links between species, you are totaly disputing the fact it could have happened?
    Actually my point was that biologists don't know what family/species the Homo family came from. So making a statement, such as, "...it was actualy a tree shrew type animal. Both apes and humans evolved from this..." is pure speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Surely a before, most of the middle and an after is good enough?
    I was hoping you would notice that their have not been any connections of known homo members. So how can one put so much faith into a theory with no evidence. Just a bunch of species abruptly appearing and disappearing in the fossil record with no known immediate ancestors or immediate descendants, that would probably sum up all if not most of the fossil record.

    And, TBH, I think if Darwin was alive today the thought of evolution by means of natural selection would never have crossed his mind. When he made his theory, He and all scientists thought a cell was a blob of goo. However I do think Darwin was right about his natural selection theory, but the process of natural selection will only stay in species, not cross kingdoms and phyla.
    Quote of the Month:
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaMoFoThief View Post
    how do you do the angled "+"

  8. #38
    Platinum Subscription Iron Maiden's Avatar

    Rank
    Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    3,865
    Likes (Received)
    33

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Ok, so you have proven that evolution has it's holes and "missing links."

    Now, let me show you what creationism is missing.

    1. The fact that you cannot create something from nothing.

    Plain and simple, creationism just can't get over that one now can it?

  9. #39
    Ultimate Member

    Rank
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    197
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron_Maiden View Post
    Ok, so you have proven that evolution has it's holes and "missing links."

    Now, let me show you what creationism is missing.

    1. The fact that you cannot create something from nothing.

    Plain and simple, creationism just can't get over that one now can it?
    so you say that evolution can go from nothing to something?
    [I]Real Joy awaits each of us

  10. #40
    *****istrator of Awesome Nuklear's Avatar

    Rank
    Gamma
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,653
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by YukiNeko View Post
    so you say that evolution can go from nothing to something?
    That's what I was thinking.

    Also, can someone please post any contradictions that they claim is in the Bible.


  11. #41
    Registered fealoro's Avatar

    Rank
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    I think you didn't understand what a scientific theory is.
    A theory is something that you use to prove something until you get a counterproof.
    Evolutionism is a theory, that has a lot of weakness, and the discussion between scientists is what will be the evolutionistic theory that better will solve the problem. This is the role of scientist, make a theory and prove it. The problem is that the evolution is not easily repeatable, but the debate about evolutionism exists and the theory itself evolves.
    Creationism, if involve something preternatural, is not a theory, because something preternatural cannot have a counterproof.
    Dealing with evolution is like to have some photos and suppose that they are in sequences, we can't be 100% sure, but that will be the best scientific guess we can do.
    What theory can explain fossils better than an evolutionistic ones?

    Also, you cannot use a probabilistic counterproof to deny a theory. A counterproof is: 'this thing will never happens', not: 'this thing will almost never happens'

    that my 2 cents..

    ah, and apologize for my bad english ;)
    Last edited by fealoro; 06-03-07 at 01:43 PM. Reason: miss some verbs and plurals, sorry

  12. #42
    Your ad here for $5 Loregoreth's Avatar

    Rank
    True Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    278
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    "1. The fact that you cannot create something from nothing."

    I believe that the big bang uses this too. Where do you suppose the first materials for the big bang came from? and if they came from other materials where did those materials come from... and so on.
    Quote of the Month:
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaMoFoThief View Post
    how do you do the angled "+"

  13. #43
    Registered fealoro's Avatar

    Rank
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Loregoreth View Post
    "1. The fact that you cannot create something from nothing."

    I believe that the big bang uses this too. Where do you suppose the first materials for the big bang came from? and if they came from other materials where did those materials come from... and so on.
    The theory that suppose the big bang did not state that you can obtain something from nothing. the big bang is a singolarity that prevent us to have any idea of what there was before. We cannot know what will be before the big bang, because the equations are not able to tell us. But it's not like to say you create something from nothing

  14. #44
    Browncoat Robert's Avatar

    Rank
    Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,946
    Likes (Received)
    902

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Loregoreth View Post
    "1. The fact that you cannot create something from nothing."

    I believe that the big bang uses this too. Where do you suppose the first materials for the big bang came from? and if they came from other materials where did those materials come from... and so on.
    Before the big bang there was no matter. If there is no matter there is no time.

    You cant ask what was before the big bang because in essense there cannot of been a before.

    For all we know there could of just been a massive amount of energy, which when the big happened turned into matter and thus time was created. This massive amount of energy is what i think of when someone talks about god...

  15. #45
    Ultimate Member

    Rank
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    197
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Creationism or Evolution - The Great Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by fealoro View Post
    The theory that suppose the big bang did not state that you can obtain something from nothing. the big bang is a singolarity that prevent us to have any idea of what there was before. We cannot know what will be before the big bang, because the equations are not able to tell us. But it's not like to say you create something from nothing
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Before the big bang there was no matter.
    Fealoro implies there had to be something before the big bang, whilst Robert says there wasn't anything before.

    Sounds confusing if not plain inconsistent to me.
    [I]Real Joy awaits each of us

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

HostKey
Sponsored by HostKey , secured by Incapsula and mods by DBTech.
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:12 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright , Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.