bigtomatofarmer
Well-Known Member
So, what do YOU believe will happen after you die?
Heaven? Hell? Purgatory? Ghosts? Nothing?
Heaven? Hell? Purgatory? Ghosts? Nothing?
So, what do YOU believe will happen after you die?
Heaven? Hell? Purgatory? Ghosts? Nothing?
The book is called On the Origin of Species.
I've read a lot of it, he clearly states the mechanisms involved in his theory.
His theory includes the idea that all life present on earth came from the same form of life billions of years ago, but the book mainly focuses on the observed changes in specific species over time, like dogs and birds, finches in particular, and his travels to the Galapagos Islands where he started putting everything together after observing the nature around him. This book was published in 1859.. that's 150 years ago. The theory of evolution back in that day was at it's most basic level, nowhere near where it is today,
so the point you're trying to make, even if it was valid, is moot because the theory is not the same today and nobody believes the exact same things Darwin did,
that's why it's sort of silly to call someone a "Darwinist" or an "Evolutionist"
(also why you only hear those terms from the religious community, also another reason I think you are not telling me the full truth to your background, scientists don't use those terms,
those words were made up to make the theory seem less valid to the layman who doesn't understand it)
random mutation would be one of them.
.. it makes about as much sense as calling someone a "Newtonian" or a "Gravitationist" if they believe in the theory of gravity, or a "Einsteinian" or a "Relativist" if they believe in the theory of relativity..
It does state that, but it also states a lot of other things too. It's not just natural selection that drives evolution, there are five other (known) factors involved. What's the point?
So basically what you're saying is you accept 'micro-evolution' - that is, change in the same species over time, ex. dogs, birds, cats, etc. but you deny 'macro-evolution'
no. they wouldn't. I wouldn't be me.
- that is, change from one species to another totally different species (the definition of that simply being one species one generation then another species a few generations later that is incapable of breeding fertile offspring with the original species, which we've observed multiple times aleady..) ex. land animals evolving into whales, dinosaurs evolving into birds, reptiles/amphibians evolving into mammals. - Is that right?
To that I ask, what's the difference? What if I changed a million different things about you, do you think people would still be able to recognize who you are?
That's not what it is though, you can't just call something what you think it is and go from there.. How life began is a-biogenesis, not evolution. It's a very important distinction, one has nothing to do with the other.
Amino acids are the building blocks OF DNA. They are what hold the information within the DNA code.
They have recreated these in the lab, established the beginning stages of synthetic life, that is amazing. What will you guys say when they actually create single celled lifeforms under laboratory conditions? - that they're not actually 'alive'? (probably because they don't have ''souls''... am I right?)
Also, explain to me why every single living thing on earth is coded with DNA and carbon based.
Why would an intelligent God do that?
Doesn't the fact that every single living organism on earth ever discovered all have the exact same information structure - that is DNA,
with the base pairs being Guanine, Cytosine, Adenine and Thymine - suggest that all living things on earth are related?
You would think, out of all of them, all the millions of species ever studied, ONE would come out with some other element to be based on other than Carbon, right?
If you believe in evolution,
what reason would you have to believe in God? Where does God come into play in this equation?
What indicates, to you, that God had anything to do with the process of evolution on earth (even after already admitting that macro-evolution is impossible)?
I think this is a weak position to hold because you don't have to choose a side, you can pick the happy middle and figure it's all good. But to me, the problem still exists. I don't see a reason to believe in God
information in the dna. but there is a ton more evidence in areas other than science.
(honestly, regardless of if evolution were true or not), so how would evolution being false make creationism correct?
I see no evidence to suggest God had anything to do with the process, what evidence do you see?
So then why is it hard to believe that all these little changes would be passed down to the next generations, all of them would slowly add up and create
the larger changes are changes in body types and such. I guess that would be phyla.
new species that are incapable of producing fertile offspring, after thousands of generations? I don't understand, what is stopping the larger changes from happening that is not stopping the smaller ones?
Biology and Chemistry
And yes, that was much better, thank you for taking it point by point.
Ive always Imagined that, since we are said to have a soul, that your soul would be made of energy. Science 101 states that energy never dies it just changes form. All the heat and electrical impulses from the body have to dissipate and go somewhere. People report ghosts as balls of light and illuminated figures and it gets extremly cold when in the presence of an apparition. For a ghost to create enough energy to be seen by the living it must produce a large amount of energy which explains the coldness...they absorb heat from the surrounding atmosphere to illuminate themselves coalesce into a visible form. And as Anhedonia said, the state of mind of the person at the time of death determines the state of mind of the spirit. A violent horrible death leads to an angry, spiteful spirit whos psyche is shattered and twisted. Those who die a natural, peaceful death become Inlightened. Their mind is clear they remember loved ones and still have understanding.
It is actually called:
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
...favored races huh.....
I think we all know what the book is called.
He also clearly states the downfall of his theory.
Which now is (his theory's downfall is a reality. he didn't know that at the time.) clearly established in the fossil record.
wrong. Darwin's theory is the basis of modern evolutionary theory.
I hate the term 'evolution' because it has soooo many meanings.
Right. There is NO proof for macroevolution.
Darwin thought they'd be discovered. They haven't.
"As a result, individuals on Pod Mrcaru have heads that are longer, wider and taller than those on Pod Kopiste, which translates into a big increase in bite force," says Irschick. "Because plants are tough and fibrous, high bite forces allow the lizards to crop smaller pieces from plants, which can help them break down the indigestible cell walls."
"One well known macroevolutionary event is the specialization of lizards on Caribbean islands. Lizards have evolved into 150 different species spread across these islands. Losos and his colleagues write that their lizard experiment suggests that macroevolution is simply microevolution observed over a much larger time period."
Yeah. They carry the information. Where did the information come from.???!!!!!!!!
Why does every car have an engine?
Why wouldn't an intelligent God use what works?
Carbon and DNA.
So are you asking why we don't see Java programs in a C++ world?
It's a matter of what best fits the evidence.
We see INFORMATION in the cell. How did it get there?
Darwinian processes aren't enough to explain it!
Some form of intelligent life is responsible for our life. There is no escaping that SCIENTIFIC discovery.
Now is it aliens????
I say HELL NO. But thats another story.
The Cambrian Explosion.
the larger changes are changes in body types and such. I guess that would be phyla.
We don't see small, slow change in the fossil record. We see jumps.
Darwin's theory is wrong, and he knew it. He just had faith that the fossil record would show him to be right. It hasn't. As a matter of fact, he's wrong. And he understood why.
You seriously are trippin' man!
T Rex lived for MILLIONS of years.... Millions!! .
millions haha hoax jokes its all fun
A fan of Kent Hovind by any chance. You seem to use his arguments quite often, if not his arguments then very close to. If so you should check this out.millions haha hoax jokes its all fun