Oh, I just figured out why he has only positive comments. New comments need approval before they're added. And as Roto made me aware of, he disabled ratings after 5 votes, just enough to get 5 stars.
I hope this person dies a very violent death at a very young age.
-edit-
Now that I'm done being pissed off at him stopping me from commenting, I would like to point out that I particularly like Grinen's 4th question.
Last edited by Mirage; 04-21-2007 at 01:05 AM.
everything is wrapped in gray
i'm focusing on your image
can you hear me in the void?
If you're questioning evolution you are a monkey. and it's been said so many smurfing times so far.Originally Posted by gyrus
and since it won't stick with anyone of you creationist idiots;
WE DID NOT EVOLVE *FROM* MONKEYS. WE HAVE A COMMON ANCESTOR
Now if we are through being idiots.
Creationists are morons. You all say "prove that we evolved" well, prove god exists let alone created us.
I want CONCRETE 100% undisputable evidence that god exists.
Grinenshire, those are fantastic questions. Infact, let's leave it open for any of these creatures that believe we just showed up cause some *thing* decided to one day. I wanna see what you all have to say.
This is fantastic. The response videos are... also fantastic.
They're there, they're called crabs.
B-E-N-D-E-R BEEENNNDER! B-E-N-D-E-R BEEEENNNDER!
I'm gonna take a crack at the questions.
1.Where did the space for the universe come from?
Can't say for a fact.
2.Where did matter come from?
Ditto.
3.Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
No good with physics.
4.How did matter get so perfectly organized?
Lord, it's NOT! Everything in this world is steeped in chaos. There's not really a rhyme or reason to anything. The closest you get is atoms trying to achieve a neutral charge, but even then, there's rules, and exceptions, and exceptions to the exceptions.
5.Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
n/a
6.When, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?
Dunno. Chance?
7.When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
Basic survival. it's an innate knowledge that we will not last forever, so we procreate to fill the void we leave. Just...basic instinct.
8.With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
Who knows? Perhaps it was capable of sexual and asexual reproduction.
9.Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
As I mentioned, it's simply the drive to carry the genetic material on.
10.How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)
Because sometimes it DOESN'T work. In those cases, the flaw dies with the afflicted. In the cases where it actually works, the trait is carried forward.
11.Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?
*Shrugs* I can't discount that outright, but as was mentioned, all evidence at our disposal dictates that we evolved from primates.
12.Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?
It's not necessarily increasing complexity...it's not adding code, per se...it's just rearranging it in a new, and unique way.
13.When, where, why, and how did:
-Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?)
-Single-celled animals evolve?
-Fish change to amphibians?
-Amphibians change to reptiles?
-Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!)
-How did the intermediate forms live?
Can't say. The best I have is that they filled a niche at that time. You assume too fast of a time frame. By all geological accounts, the Earth has been around for, what, a billion years, give or take? Humans have only been around for less than 50,000 of them. That leaves a LOT of time for tweaking and perfecting.
14.When, where, why, how, and from what did:
-Whales evolve?
-Sea horses evolve?
-Bats evolve?
-Eyes evolve?
-Ears evolve?
-Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?
Dunno.
15.Which evolved first (how, and how long; did it work without the others)?
The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?
The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
The immune system or the need for it?
Bearing in mind that even the most basic cells can merely absorb nutrients, it only makes sense that as we evolved, the body would attempt to emulate it as best as possible.
16.There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?
Again...filling a niche Both creatures need something they cannot provide for themselves, and as such, fill it for each other. They evolve to depend on each other.
17.How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?
But it is chance, or starts out as such. A butterfly spontaneously develops darker wings, making it look more like, say, a leaf...it survives...to make more that look like it.
18.When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve the theory of evolution.
Perhaps it's from a very social ancestry...we've retained our "pack" devotions over our personal drives, at least for the most part. It's still serving a purpose, so it wouldn't be pushed out.
19.*How did photosynthesis evolve?
A means of harvesting energy at a basic level. Light is abundant, so it may as well be used.
20.*How did thought evolve?
It's our niche. We ae weak, we are slow, and we are delicate. Without intelligence...logic...we'd've died out long ago.
21.*How did flowering plants evolve, and from what?
The pretty flowers attract bees and other means of pollenation. Plants developed flowers, and the ones most attractive to the creatures spreading the pollen will be the most likely to survive.
22.*What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?
I dunno. Do I believe a higher power may have gotten the ball rolling? It's a distinct possibility. But there's too much evidence to ignore to say that we just were poofed into existence.
23.What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
I'd've been curious, I suppose.
24.*Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?
Macroevolution, provided I understand the concept, is when a massive change strikes an environment, leaving many roles and niches unfulfilled. Thus the environment, an all in it grow to fill in those gaps. It's impossible to predict.
25.*What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen as becoming human?
As a strict Point A to point B? Nothing, as it's not possible. It was a slow process, over millions, possibly billions of years.
26.Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?
Is that not the foundation of Creationism? That God took a void, and filled it with his creation?
Many thanks Christmas!
Horniest Member, 2007! Gimme a little unf unf!
First of all, I'm not biased in any way because i believe there is a god and a heaven. I believe in evolution, because it makes more sense than God did it. And I love how in the video if your argument is against creationism, you get a one way ticket straight to hell. He never even considers evolution at all, doesn't even look at it, just says its plain Bull. At least look at it before saying, "I didn't come from a monkey," because apparently, thats all he knows about evolution.
You see I have a Bible Boy in my biology class. He doesn't get the fact that evolution is a theory and he isn't being forced to believe it. He thinks creationism should be taught in public schools. No. It shouldn't. If you want to learn creationism, St. Joe's is down the street. And if we even think about teaching Creationism, then you better have a class that teaches about every religion's thought on how we got here. I go to school not church.
Edit: I will post an arguement on his video, see if it passes, or see if he says, "Believe what I say or you're going to hell." < that's the thing I don't like about religion.
And the pentagram thing, I believe thats a coincidence. The way he said it made me Lawl. he had the same tone of voice as the Dumbass from loose change.(a really funny movie)
Active after a year? ZOMG.
But yeah when i DID post a year ago I was an ass to everyone. So sorry about that. You can totally tell I used to think i was "gangsta" just by my name. Boy have I changed.
Thats my primary issue with the harcore bible crowd.
Anytime something comes along that they think contradicts it, they say it isn't so, and want to force everyone to think that way too.
Even when it's been proven.
It took centuries for the church to finally apologize for trying to stop the idea that the earth goes around the sun. By that time it had become common knowledge anyhow, and all the participants in the original conflict were long dead. Big fat hairy deal.
If the church really wants to do something that actually means anything, it should quit hassling the scientific community and focus more on rooting out it's child molestors.
I don't see them clamoring to have Hindu or Shinto creation stories told in school.
(gee I wonder why...)
(no, actually I don't)
I believe in Evolution because it makes perfect logical sense. Also, science doesn't claim to know everything, whereas the Bible people just say that 'God did it' to cover their lack of knowledge.
"Reality is that which,
when you stop believing in it,
doesn't go away".
Philip K. Dick
Oh... neat. We lost quite a bit in this thread too... must be the God's will.
Unless you can prove the negative claim, you boast ignorance/arrogance.Before the versa gets viced, faith is key to beleiving in the writings far older than any objective evidence than evolutionary science even has. Not that this concludes anything, besides quit insinuating it is made up, and trying to objectify it.
Last edited by bipper; 04-24-2007 at 03:54 PM.
There's no such thing as proving a negative. There's only a lack of evidence for supporting a positive. With evolution, we have positive evidence of that occuring. With "Intelligent Design," there is no positive evidence. There's no "negative evidence," either, because such a thing does not and cannot exist.
you can prove a negative. It is one of only two things you can prove. Simple Boolean logic, it is or it is not. If it is, it can not. simple enough. To prove a negative, you must prove a positive that negates the negative. IE: fact: a dog ate all the food. Negative assertion: The cat ate all the food. We know that if A is a fact, B cannot be true. You assert the very same in the latter part of your post, nullifying your opening thoughts.
Either way, there is some evidence down certain 'rabit holes' for intelligent design. Some evidence for the flood, in some cases. Realistically, we just do not understand enough of A to nullify B ~ nor do many people even care. It is just a battle of bloated ego anymore.
As for evolution - I agree with many parts of the theory, but not it's entirety.
Is lack of evidence what you call negative evidence?
I mean, I could just as well say that all Martians are female. Would that make my statement true simply because we have no means of proving the opposite?
Even more so, if I said that all Martians are female and somebody found a male Martian 20 years later, would that make me "more" right because I said it earlier?
EDIT: On the matter of your "flood". There are two ways of writing things, documentary and fiction. If I wrote that the war in Iraq took many lives, it would be a documentary. If I wrote that the war in Iraq took many lives while a group of Red Mages rescued Saddam, it'd be a fiction. Same applies for the flood.
It does not make it true, but it does not make it false either.
we know A is a fact, granted that it was observed by someone. And if A was witnessed, then B is just a false statement.
All that proves is that the person doesn't know the difference between a dog & a cat.
I'm still waiting for someone to prove god exists.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
