Discussion: Evolution

[GarudA]

I agree.

If we evolved from apes why do we still have apes?

I think you need to read up more on Evolution as we did NOT evolve from apes we share a common ancestor. Apes are different branches of the same family tree.

 

[Cobblepot]

Then we evolved out of one species of Ape...

 

[Cobblepot]

Humans will not evolve much most likely. We might get a little smarter and more attractive,

If we grow up behind computer screens in an air controlled envirement, we will evolve and it won't be pretty.

 

[raybia]

I think you need to read up more on Evolution as we did NOT evolve from apes we share a common ancestor. Apes are different branches of the same family tree.

I understand the theory of the "Missing link". And it will stay a theory because this link isn't missing, it doesn't exist.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that man and apes evolved from a common ancestor. In the face of the picture presented by the fossil record, evolutionist paleontologists admit that they have abandoned hope of finding a missing link between man and the chimpanzee.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

And it will stay a theory because this link isn't missing, it doesn't exist.

HaHaHaHaHa!
Sweet.

With no proof of the negative, you're making a statement of fact..."It doesn't exist".

*Newsflash!*
Allah isn't "invisible", He doesn't exist.

Care to try and disprove that factual statement?
lol
Jesus

 

[DorkyFresh]

Evolution is not scientific fact.

how do you explain cars, buildings, phones, tv's, movies, video games, media players, and computers all being much better than they were when they were first invented? they weren't invented and kept the same...they were improved. they EVOLVED into better versions of themselves.


if evolution is not a scientific fact then how do you explain how things CHANGE?

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

how do you explain cars, buildings, phones, tv's, movies, video games, media players, and computers all being much better than they were when they were first invented? they weren't invented and kept the same...they were improved. they EVOLVED into better versions of themselves.


if evolution is not a scientific fact then how do you explain how things CHANGE?

OMG, you should've taken a sec to re-think this dumb post.
My condolences.

No, Nintendos and cell phones do not evolve.

X 1,000

 

[Mee]

There's a difference in "poof! I have wings!" evolution, and "a bunch of Japanese guys tinkered with my hardware and now I'm a better system!" evolution.



But, I don't believe in evolution anyway.

 

[GarudA]

I understand the theory of the "Missing link". And it will stay a theory because this link isn't missing, it doesn't exist.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that man and apes evolved from a common ancestor. In the face of the picture presented by the fossil record, evolutionist paleontologists admit that they have abandoned hope of finding a missing link between man and the chimpanzee.

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

"Missing link" isn't a scientific term at all. For example, No one would claim astronomy is flawed simply because we haven't and cannot possibly catalogue every star in the universe.

Also we are progressing in finding more evidence.

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/060325_ap_ethiopia_herectus.html

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

But, I don't believe in evolution anyway.

You just don't get it.

If you took an 8-track tape, and left it on the beach for several million years, it WOULD eventually evolve into a CD. Science.

( Seriously, Dorkyfresh, I'm still trembling over how ******ed that post of yours was. )

 

[Mee]

You just don't get it.

If you took an 8-track tape, and left it on the beach for several million years, it WOULD eventually evolve into a CD. Science.

That's fine and dandy, but who would still have a cd player by then?

:cfrustrated:

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

That's fine and dandy, but who would still have a cd player by then?

:cfrustrated:

Toasters would evolve into R2D2's, and R2D2 has a CD player for a mouth.

 

[DorkyFresh]

OMG, you should've taken a sec to re-think this dumb post.

people tend to hate on what they don't understand. you calling my post 'dumb' proves that point. it's okay if you're not smart enough to understand my point, Wilhelm..."my condolences"

No, Nintendos and cell phones do not evolve.

e·volve /ɪˈvɒlv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-volv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, e·volved, e·volv·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to develop gradually:

by definition...Nintendos and cell phones DO evolve.

 

[DorkyFresh]

If you took an 8-track tape, and left it on the beach for several million years, it WOULD eventually evolve into a CD. Science.

you mean to tell me that if you took a person, left him/her on the beach for several millions of years, that person would eventually evolve into a higher being?

evolution is like revision. you can't change one person (one 8-track tape) but if that person reproduces (if the 8-track is reproduced) then eventually the reproduction will, hopefully, turn out better than the original (8-track tapes to cd-players).

man-made things might not be biological evolution, but it's still evolution regardless of your limited understanding of the word.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

people tend to hate on what they don't understand. you calling my post 'dumb' proves that point. it's okay if you're not smart enough to understand my point, Wilhelm..."my condolences"



e·volve /ɪˈvɒlv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-volv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, e·volved, e·volv·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to develop gradually:

by definition...Nintendos and cell phones DO evolve.

holyjesuseffingchrist

THEY don't do it....sport.

Humans.....humans....( I can't even believe I have to explain this ) take an existing idea, and then make something else, similar, based on the idea, but THEY improve it....and, *holygod* MAKE a NEW thing.


This discussion is not about the semantics involving the word "evolution"
It's about the idea that out of inorganic matter, suddenly...spontaneously, life appeared, and then, that unicellular life EVOLVED into more complex forms of life.

Playstations do not EVOLVE into XBOX 360's, they don't gradually change.

I......is this a hoax?

 

[tomahawk53]

I am a Christian and I believe in Evolution 100%.

I'm also an anthropologist at heart and according to my college degree too. So I've studied quite a bit about evolution.

I believe in Creation through Evolution.

 

[tomahawk53]

I......is this a hoax?

You've been PUNKED!

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

You've been PUNKED!

I pray so, 'cause seriously....maybe I'm being gullible....I don't know this "Dorkyfresh", but...

(if the 8-track is reproduced) then eventually the reproduction will, hopefully, turn out better than the original (8-track tapes to cd-players).

is.......HOWLINGLY.......okay, sorry....lol, no one's that stupid.

Ya got me DF. up:

 

[DorkyFresh]

This discussion is not about the semantics involving the word "evolution"
It's about the idea that out of inorganic matter, suddenly...spontaneously, life appeared, and then, that unicellular life EVOLVED into more complex forms of life.

who crowned you "king of the thread"? you don't decide what gets discussed here. the original poster didn't say that this thread was specifically to discuss ONLY "organic" or "biological" evolution...

...get off your high-horse and quite being an @$$.

 

[Kent]

I understand the theory of the "Missing link". And it will stay a theory because this link isn't missing, it doesn't exist.

This statement makes it painfully obvious you have no clue whatsoever where the term "the missing link" comes from, or what it refers to. Therefore I have to conclude you do not understand the theory of the "missing link".

Your question in an earlier post: "If man evolved from apes, why are there still apes?" likewise reveals how little you actually know about evolutionary theory, how evolution works, or what it suggests about the origin of man.
Your question is akin to asking "If I came from my grandfather, why do I have cousins?".

There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that man and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

Except for the mounds of evidence from molecular biology, the fossil record, biogeography, comparative anatomy, and comparative embryology (among others)... yeah... there's nothing!

In the face of the picture presented by the fossil record, evolutionist paleontologists admit that they have abandoned hope of finding a missing link between man and the chimpanzee.

The "picture" presented by the fossil record?

 

[raybia]

HaHaHaHaHa!
Sweet.

With no proof of the negative, you're making a statement of fact..."It doesn't exist".

*Newsflash!*
Allah isn't "invisible", He doesn't exist.

Care to try and disprove that factual statement?
lol
Jesus

The burden of proof isn't on me. Its not called Raybiaism. The burden is on Neo-Darwinism.

And this isn't religion we are dealing with, its a scientific theory and theories can be disproven. However if you think about it, I guess you could consider Darwinism a religion.

There are many people in the world who are devoted to it. Some believe that evolution is a scientifically proven fact, and the world lies under the influence of this so called scientific position.

However, the existence of G-d has not been discredited but the theory of evolution has.

Since this theory first appeared, a large number of scientific findings have invalidated its claims one by one.

The development of the electron microscope, new knowledge of genetic laws, the discovery of the structure of DNA, the revelation of the complexity of every living organism, and other modern advances have defeated Darwinism.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

who crowned you "king of the thread"? you don't decide what gets discussed here. the original poster didn't say that this thread was specifically to discuss ONLY "organic" or "biological" evolution...

...get off your high-horse and quite being an @$$.

i am not "King of the Thread". it's just common sense that this is about Creationism vs. Evolution.

Witness the...first post....by, the threadmaker:

I'm getting pretty tired of hearing people call it "just a theory". Creationism isn't scientific because it refuses to accept that it could be wrong, therefore it isn't a "science". Scientists have been able to say when they're wrong whilst I've never hear a creationist even admit the possibility. If you're a creationist I would like you to answer these simply Darwinian questions.

• Why do men have nipples?
• Why do whales have vestigal legs on their bellies?
• Why do some form of beatles that never open their wing cases have fully functionable wings?

Uh......DARWIN did not propose that Guttenberg's printing press would someday have little baby printing presses with a Mama printing press, and after billions of years, their printing press species would evolve into an ink-jet printer.......K?.....k.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The burden of proof isn't on me. Its not called Raybiaism. The burden is on Neo-Darwinism.

And this isn't religion we are dealing with, its a scientific theory and theories can be disproven. However if you think about it, I guess you could consider Darwinism a religion.

There are many people in the world who are devoted to it. Some believe that evolution is a scientifically proven fact, and the world lies under the influence of this so called scientific position.

However, the existence of G-d has not been discredited but the theory of evolution has.

Since this theory first appeared, a large number of scientific findings have invalidated its claims one by one.

The development of the electron microscope, new knowledge of genetic laws, the discovery of the structure of DNA, the revelation of the complexity of every living organism, and other modern advances have defeated Darwinism.

Great.
There is also proof of special evolution, recorded in recent times.

If you want to show me some proof that your invisible, imaginary friend exists, PLEASE do!

 

[raybia]

This statement makes it painfully obvious you have no clue whatsoever where the term "the missing link" comes from, or what it refers to. Therefore I have to conclude you do not understand the theory of the "missing link".

I don't have to fully understand it to be false.

Your question in an earlier post: "If man evolved from apes, why are there still apes?" likewise reveals how little you actually know about evolutionary theory, how evolution works, or what it suggests about the origin of man.
Your question is akin to asking "If I came from my grandfather, why do I have cousins?".

No its not.

 

[raybia]

If you want to show me some proof that your invisible, imaginary friend exists, PLEASE do!

Why would I need you to proof something to me that I already believe to be true? Save your asine remarks for the weak minded.