User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 74 of 147 FirstFirst ... 246470717273747576777884124 ... LastLast
Results 585 to 592 of 1176

Thread: Where does everyone stand in regards to...

  1. #585

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ARGH!!! NOT AGAIN! my post got deleted. here's what i said in a nutshell.
    first of all, I've noticed that all the people I've ever talked to who didn't believe in evolution were christians. That shows top-down thinking because scientists wouldn't include the "great flood" (which would have been IMPOSSIBLE)

    that site talks about racism and hitler and darwin being a psychotic... that just goes to show
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Most biology textbooks show a glass apparatus in which the precursors for amino acids were boiled and electrically sparked for a week, and sure enough, there were trace amounts of a few amino acids. The implication is that if similar, unthinking processes were continued, then a living cell would evolve. Such logic is like stating that automobiles evolved long ago by means of rubber sap, sand, iron ore, and coal falling into a volcano. The iron ore and the carbon in the coal made steel, the sand melted and made glass, and the sap vulcanized and made rubber. Then after billions and billions of trials and errors, the text may say, there evolved spontaneously better and better pistons, cylinders, whole engines with spark plugs and transmissions, axles on four wheels with rubber tires under bodies of steel with glass windows, windshield wipers, headlights, and tanks full of gasoline. The text might state that the first cell and all life evolved in a similar way.
    how life began has nothing to do with evolution.
    That analogy is COMPLETELY and utterly ... wrong. The environment they re-created in the lab was like the one in the earth, and amino acids have been found in meteors. so we KNOW they occur naturaly. Besides... there are many enzymes and other things necessary for life that occur naturally without help form life.

    I can't find the document (I had already written a response and closed the document window and then the post got deleted) but there was one that said evolution was all by random chance.
    That's not ture. natural SELECTION is not random.
    It also said that genomes "leap". that's also not true. Evolution is GRADUAL.
    They also resort to talking about hitler being an evolutionist and that it leads to racism and abortion and that darwin was supposedly psychotic and that evolution is a RELIGION and not science...
    oh please. They also talk about "noah's flood" ... very scientific.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]That marvelous first cell, the story goes, filled the oceans with progeny competing in incredible polysaccharide, lipid, amino acid, nucleotide, and cannibalistic feasts. The predators thereby thinned the soup to the watery oceans we have today while the prey escaped by mystically transmuting themselves into the current complex animals and plants, or perhaps vice versa because no one was there to record it. We are assured by the disciples of Darwin and Huxley that the "once upon a pond" story to obtain a blob of protoplasm is still sufficient for the spontaneous generation of the cell as we know it today.
    first of all evolution is NOT about the beginnings of life so this is totally irrelevant to evolution (shows you how educated they are about evolution...)
    the first cell wasn't like we know cells today. It was much simpler. and who said it was a "predator"? it was probably chemosynthetic.
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]The mutation may confer a benefit in a particular environment, but the overall fitness of the population of one kind of bacterium is decreased as a result of a reduced function of one of the components in its biological pathway.
    Evolution isn't about achieving perfection. It's about surviving and having offspring that can do the same. Sometimes you trade things in evolution. like we traded being able to walk upright for lower back pains, and like we traded being able to eat better for having useless wisdom teeth...

    I was just skimming around because I have tons of homework to do :-/
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  2. #586

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]As long as they also believe gravity and magnetism should only be taught as theory, not fact. As one of our more vocal correspondents has pointed out repeatedly, people are being tripped up by the word theory.
    I can't stress that enough. It drives me NUTS! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_k_ani_32.gif[/img]
    (I ain't finished with the site by the way... I'll take a good look at it when I have time... unless you don't want me to :P)
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  3. #587

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We know gravity exists as a fact but the explanation is theory.
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  4. #588
    endparenthesis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,262
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There was a nice article on Intelligent Design in Wired a few months ago:

    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/evolution.html

    I particularly like this line:

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]"I'm not a PhD in biology," says board member Michael Cochran. "But when I have X number of PhD experts telling me this, and X number telling me the opposite, the answer is probably somewhere between the two." An exasperated Krauss claims that a truly representative debate would have had 10,000 pro-evolution scientists against two Discovery executives.

  5. #589

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Zone 9
    Posts
    455
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]ARGH!!! NOT AGAIN! my post got deleted. here's what i said in a nutshell.
    first of all, I've noticed that all the people I've ever talked to who didn't believe in evolution were christians. That shows top-down thinking because scientists wouldn't include the "great flood" (which would have been IMPOSSIBLE)
    Anybody who doesn't beleive in creation (wether by God or some other deity) has to come up with some other explanation. Scientists don't include the "great flood". They don't include an explanation for why the earths population is what it is today, if people have been reproducing since hundreds of thousand if not millions of years ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]That analogy is COMPLETELY and utterly ... wrong. The environment they re-created in the lab was like the one in the earth, and amino acids have been found in meteors.
    In they lab the provided electric sparks for a week. By your logic, this means that in nature, there must have been gentle steady lightning hitting the earth before life developed.

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]It also said that genomes "leap". that's also not true. Evolution is GRADUAL.
    So much for the punctuated equlibrium theory [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/confused.gif[/img]

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]first of all evolution is NOT about the beginnings of life so this is totally irrelevant to evolution (shows you how educated they are about evolution...)
    So, was life created or did it evolve? I thought we were just talking about the development of amino acids...

    Peter
    the cellist

  6. #590

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm on the same side as you Peter but I don't get where you are going with the human population thing. Afterall, flies/cockroaches/mice/frogs/cats etc. reproduce at astounding rates yet we are for the most part not covered in them. They have ways of being kept in check whether by predators or natural phenomenom such as the weather disease etc. Not to mention carrying capacity. In the case of humans, carrying capacity has increased due to our "improved" agriculture methods.

    I forgot the exact math but if you started with a pair of houseflies supposedly at the end of the year you would have around 1 million flies.
    1 Nxventrata

    D. muscipula & D. muscipula 'Red Dragon'(barely)

    Sarracenia leucophylla(seedling)

    S. purpurea and Drosera filiformis filiformis/ intermedia seeds waiting to sprout.

    Drosera capensis

  7. #591
    Tropical Fish Enthusiast jimscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    18,768
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (Rubra @ Jan. 07 2005,12:06)]So, was life created or did it evolve? I thought we were just talking about the development of amino acids...

    Peter
    I don't see why both can't be true! God does the creating but uses what we understand to be evolution as His method of doing things. I'm not saying that this IS what He did, only that it is POSSIBLE for Him to do so. We just weren't there when He did all of this.

  8. #592
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the experenemt with ammino acids was not ment to show what happened, meary that it could appen, wich is the first step.


    [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/confused.gif[/img] i think its laughable how some of you refere to sience as somethig big and special, and others say its lies.

    science, my freinds, in nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img]
    that makes no logic

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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