|
||||||
 |
Recent Posts | Search by username | |
Contact Us | |
Login | |
Register |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Religion & Philosophy > The Official Evolution vs Creation thread for 24 and PMH. |
| Moderated by: 24HourNut | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...   |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
cynicalninja Forum-Blogger© Original500© Member  Smiling Shinobi
|
  |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24HourNut wrote: Pmh thinks dinosaurs and humans were together on the Ark!       Pmh?, I have some magic beans I want to sell you. Attachment: (Downloaded times)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator  aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LOL, that pic is pretty damn funny!
 The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"It's simple. Have a species in a niche and over time the survivors will be more customized and adapted to that environment by natural selection." Yes, this is simply a bunch of pseudo-scientific speculation that doesn't hold up under hard scientific scrutiny. It's very easy to throw out speculations but the science related to genetics and mutations renders those speculation highly improbable as being the answer for the existence of advanced life forms. And your religion bashing adds nothing of value to the discussion other then to point out your ignorance on both subjects.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yes, this is simply a bunch of pseudo-scientific speculation that doesn't hold up under hard scientific scrutiny. Unlike inter-continental teleporting slugs and gigantic Brontosauruses next to humans on an Ark does, right? It's very easy to throw out speculations but the science related to genetics and mutations renders those speculation highly improbable as being the answer for the existence of advanced life forms. It's even easier to be scientifically retarded and use the Bible as your guide. We know the niche exploitation and mechanism for multiple and ongoing series of micro evolutionary activity which results in larger evolutionary activity is scientifically sound and is in-line with the world-wide scientific community and evidence. Speculation? You mean, like, Adam and Eve started the human race is scientifically sound and not "speculation?" And your religion bashing adds nothing of value to the discussion other then to point out your ignorance on both subjects. It's not religion bashing - it's spotlighting your unscientific religious-based fantasies and ignorance regarding how humans evolved from primates and where new species come from. The amount of science and number of fields we have to dismiss to take your position is astounding ... it ranges from everything from dinosaurs to dating fossils and new species arrivals, to magical teleportation and incestuous first couples and their kids. It's absurd. It's not "bashing" to point to the absurd. You bash science and common sense, along with clear-thinking modern adults, if anything.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: This is the type of simplistic scientific speculation that is a major theme in the ameba to man theory on the evolution of advanced life forms. The ability to see involves much more then just cells sensitive to light. You'll notice that when I explained the evolution of the eye, I started with primitive and worked forwards. If you begin your thought process by imagining how all of the complex systems could have evolved simultaneously, you're never going to understand it (which is what the people who taught you creationist theory count on). pmh1nic wrote: The fallacy of this theory becomes more evident as you study exactly what mutations (errors in genetic coding) and natural selection are suppose to have accomplished via random chance. Not only have I shown how many mutations aren't immediately detrimental. I've given examples of how most mutations aren't detrimental. As you say, we've been down that road before, so you can look up the old threads. (And I notice how you've tried to insert randomness in there again. Natural selection is not completely random.) The same goes for your other points, so I'll skip to your conclusion. pmh1nic wrote: The essence of this is the belief that via errors and random changes in the environment astronomical amounts of new information came into exist that bridge the gap from simple amino acids to the exceeding complex instructions for life present in advance life forms. The Hox gene demonstrates a method for great variability due to mutagenic change. In the context of our earlier conversation, I was using it to falsify the idea that there's some X number of steps you have to go through to get from point A to point B, which is what Spetner concluded. (Spetner's ideas were a large part of the earlier argument, if you'll recall.) And I might add that since our last conversation, a study has been concluded which establishes the extraterrestrial origin of a meteorite which contains uracil (a component of RNA) and xanthine (a nucleoside). What this means is that complex organic compounds (even the precursors to DNA) form in space, and could have ended up on Earth that way. (Does that mean they did land on Earth that way? Not necessarily. But it does mean that you can throw out all the calculations of DNA or RNA forming from thin air, atom by atom, because that was not a necessary step in the process of life.)
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut "It's not religion bashing - it's spotlighting your unscientific religious-based fantasies and ignorance regarding how humans evolved from primates and where new species come from." Please go back into this thread and quote my unscientific religious-based fantasies. Your argument regarding the generation of advance life forms is based in non-scientific speculations that accumlating errors produces vast volumes of new information and order. This theory is not only unscientific (haven't been plausibly demonstrated via the scientific method) it is illogical. What you have is simple life forms, with no plausible scientific explanation for there origin, changing via millions of ERRORS in genetic coding somehow accumulating over time and in partnership with happenstance circumstances in the environment producing exceeding complex life forms. That is a nice fairytale story with serious (some would argue insurmountable) problems when it comes to our understanding of just what is required on a genetic level to get from here to there. Beliving this fairytale requires an extreme exercise of faith. "It's even easier to be scientifically retarded and use the Bible as your guide." You bring religion into this because you don't have a solid scientific argument that accounts of the accumulation of new information minus a belief in random chance cosmic lottery game that we manage to win over and over again. Again, you not only don't have command of the biological issues but you're ignorant regarding what the Bible says and what it doesn't say regarding the origin of species.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please go back into this thread and quote my unscientific religious-based fantasies. You believe Adam and Eve started humans off, verses evolving from primates, do you not? Because you can't accept, due to religious reasons, that species came from previously existing ones, you dismiss science saying new species appeared gradually over the timeline and have even gone so far as to say dinosaurs were around when humans were, and on the Ark! Do you not believe that? That is religious-based fantasizing when dealing with where new species came from and the start of humans. And there is NOTHING illogical about acknowledging the giant mountain of evidence supporting lots of microevolutionary activity adding up over time to larger changes. You rely on the Bible (a book that claims incestuous first family started us for example) for guidance on these matters, I rely on the world-wide scientific community. Maybe if you didn't say ridiculous religious-based things religion wouldn't come into it. But your position that ALL the species were created at once so dinosaurs were with humans is a big religion festival. You bring religion into this because you don't have a solid scientific argument that accounts of the accumulation of new information minus a belief in random chance cosmic lottery game that we manage to win over and over again. I bring religion into it because you have to be religiously into the Bible to say what you say. That is where YOUR beliefs are based. We know this from your Adam & Eve with talking snake fantasies along with your dinosaur & human comments. That is all a product of ignorant religious-based "science." It permeates your position, and it is obvious. So, sorry. Adam & Eve and dinosaurs on the Ark is not only obscene speculation from a scientific point of view, it is a child-like emotional base upon which to draw scientific conclusions. You do that in the face of the world-wide scientific community, so why would religion NOT come into it? When discussing whether or not humans evolved from primates, your positions on that revolve and stem from the Bible - NOT the scientific community after thousands of years. Or should we all pretend that they don't? There is nothing in science that prevents a long series of micro evolutionary changes to go from primate to human over time. There is a mountain of evidence to support it. The only real reason you don't is because you believe in Adam & Eve instead!
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut Hello.... Again, go back through this thread and quote the post I made that refer to my so-called religious based fantasies.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: 24hournut I already explained what they were. It doesn't even matter if they were in this particular thread because this thread is about evolution and those are your positions, are they not? This thread was started after other conversations we had to continue them, so I am including them obviously.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I see you want to play games, as usual. Go read the first few posts and it is obvious this thread was started as a continuation for us to debate and I said "cavemen" because the focus was humans from primates. What's the matter, afraid of your own positions? They are religious-based - who are you kidding? We didn't evolve from primates you say, we started with an incestuous family. Remember, you defended how incest was OK back then? Another absurd position. Remember, you said dinosaurs and humans were together? Your whole foundation for handling the topic of humans evolving from primates is skewed and perverted due to religious based-fantasies supported by archaic text, and it is obvious. Be proud, don't run from it.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'll make it simpler. Where did humans start from? Me: primates; source: a mountain of evidence from the entire world-wide scientific community across many fields You: Adam & Eve's magical incestuous family, featuring talking snake; source: your ridiculously literal interpretation of archaic text (Bible). Where did all the current species come from? Me: previously existing species; source: a mountain of evidence from the entire world-wide scientific community across many fields You: whatever dinosaurs, people, and other creatures (some teleported from other continents using magic) got on an Ark; source: your ridiculously literal interpretation of archaic text (Bible). The notion of you saying my position is speculation and fantasy when the above are your key positions as to where humans and current species came from is beyond absurd. It's nothing more than un-scientific, beyond speculative, religious-based brainwashing and ignorance. Why would a clear-thinking modern adult assess that otherwise?
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut First, you don't know what I believe on this issue. You make claims about what I believe the Bible says on this issue (and you really have no idea what I beleive), you ridicule what YOU believe I believe the Bible says on the issue, but went I ask you to provide one quote that supports what you said you can't do it. Second, you hide behind your religion bashing because other then regurgating scientific speculation you can't defy the science and logical that dictates the advanced life forms could NOT have been produced via a process of errors and happenstance circumstances in the environment. Your religion bashing is based in ignorance regarding what the Bible says on the subject. On top of that you want to use the old argument that similarities (identified via gross observations) between various types of life forms means a common origin claiming that the monumental about of new genetic information required to bridge the gap that exist between ameba and man appeared by some "magic" that takes errors and produces new information. That is beyond absurd.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First, you don't know what I believe on this issue. You make claims about what I believe the Bible says on this issue (and you really have no idea what I beleive) I was going by your past comments and explanations. Were you lying in previous posts or something? If I am wrong, go ahead and tell me which part of what I said is some big misrepresentation. Do you not believe that humans started at Adam & Eve, for example? That's your "scientific" and "non-speculative" explanation for our origin, right? Didn't you once respond with an explanation about incest and how it wasn't the same bad thing then as it was today? Here you are explaining how it must have been supernatural for humans to appear, and that the Bible account has it right instead: The Bible says "God formed man the dust of the ground" and "breath into him the breath of life" and "man became a living soul". What can we draw from these statements. 1. Man was made distinct from the animals. 2. His body was fashion from inorganic material. 3. God's breath of life animated (gave life to) inorganic matter and in that moment also created the soul or consciousness of man. 4. The time scale of this event (creation of man) is one day and based on the terminalogy it was one 24 hour day. 5. Man's being has undergone a destructive change since his creation that has reduced his physical life span and caused him to be subject to sickness, disease and death. Mankind is devolving. Based on the above the creation of man was a supernatural event that at this point cannot be explained naturalistically. Here you are saying the exact opposite of what the world-wide scientific community says: there is no "evidence" of species between primate and humans. So, between those and countless other comments, you have made it clear that you believe the Adam & Eve story is right, and the scientific community is wrong. Should I be drawing some other conclusion? Second, you hide behind your religion bashing because other then regurgating scientific speculation you can't defy the science and logical that dictates the advanced life forms could NOT have been produced via a process of errors and happenstance circumstances in the environment. There is nothing in science that says all the evidence for lots of microevolutionary steps between primate and man is invalid. Your religion bashing is based in ignorance regarding what the Bible says on the subject. The Bible says Adam & Eve started off humans as the first couple, not evolution from primates. Isn't that what you believe as well? You also take other stuff literally - like two of every creature in the world going to an Ark, including slugs from other continents that magically got to it, right? These are the things that you've made clear shape your view as to where current humans and creatures came from. If I am off, go ahead be clear, and set me straight.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut 1. I stand by my passed comments. Man is distinct for all other creatures. While men and apes are similar (gross observation) there are millions of differences in the genetic make-up between the two. You claim the similarities mean common decent but you have no scientific or logical means of bridging the genetic cap that exist between man and animals or primates for that matter. 2. There is NOT universal scientific acceptance of the ameba to man theory. Your probably is you've been so brainwashed by the proponents of that theory is my guess is you've never read ONE book by a scientist that counters that theory. 3. If by the Adam and Eve story you mean God created man distinct from the animals yes, I believe there is hard scientific evidence that points to man being the product of intelligent design and not the result of millions of genetic mutations and environmental happenstance. 4. As far as scientific evidence AGAINST small evolutionary changes being the process by which we get from ameba to man you are wrong. There is an abundance of scientific evidence that relegates this theory a statistical impossible based on what we know about genetics, mutations, mutation rates, selective value of mutations, mutation survival in a population and the genetic differences between amebas, fish, birds other mammals and men.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
muddawber Guardian1000© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24HourNut wrote: LOL, that pic is pretty damn funny! I'm glad you enjoyed the picture MrNut. I find it very distasteful. Just be glad I'm not like the muslims. I'd have your head on a platter.   
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
