What Evolution Left Behind On Humans

Submitted by: Snoogans 10 years ago in Science
http://www.decimation.com/markw/2007/07/09/what-evolution-left-behind-on-humans

Parts of us we don"t need anymore.
There are 334 comments:
Male 1
"And congratulations most of everyone on remaining fairly mature through 14 pages of posts."

and it ends....

NinjaChiibi is an ignorant, lazy, idiot

0
Reply
Female 130
^Sorry, by sentence I ment post.

Continuing my train of thought on this matter, it would make more sense if a fish and a lizard were cousins, than a lizard being a direct decendant of a fish. Somone please correct me if im wrong though. It just seems to me that it works out better for the laws (or at least how Ive interpreted them) if there was a single type of creature way long ago who had some offspring which went on to mutate into what is now crustaceans, some of its offspring mutated into Fish, some mutated into amphibians, and from the amphibians into terrestrial lizards? Rather than a lizard coming from a fish. If they were all descended from one central creature, million of years ago, it would explain how they can have traits today which bring them together, and have developed further mutations such as the diverse species, and labryinth organs. Im just thinking online now though.

And congratulations most of everyone on remaining fairly mature through 14 pages of posts.

0
Reply
Female 130
NinjaChibi said:
Sure they show me a fish and then another species of fish with some different lungs. But still the lungfish is still a fish. It isn`t a lizard. It`s STILL the same species just a different variety.

I feel I must point out that you contradicted yourself in that sentence. A lungfish cannot be both "another species of fish" and "STILL the same species just a different variety". The only time that a different variety occurs within a species is as a breed. This also almost always only occurs in domesticated animals such as the horse, cat, rabbit and dog which have developed recognizable breeds through selective breeding (and unfortunately culling) performed by humans.

`King Phillip Came Over For Good Spaghetti`
`Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus Species`

The lungfish is a seperate species, but is a member of the same KPCOFG as mulitple other living beings. i dont know how far up the chain a fish becomes a lizard cousin though.

0
Reply
Male 332
If you want a practical exmple of evolution at work, one that was well documented and has undeniable proof, try the peppered moth story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_mo...
It went from white, to black, and then to white again. You may argue that one of those was caused by `less genetic information`, but the reverse also happened, so somewhere, genetic information had to be added.
That`s my rant. Thank you and goodnight.
0
Reply
Male 332
Thus, the population`s ears would get pointier and pointier on average over succesive generations.
Now imagine the opposite, pointy ears become a sign of the devil or some such. All my descendants are hunted down and killed. No more pointy eared babies, problem solved. This is how the environment can select for certain traits, and eliminate others. The main factor is change in the environment.
And if you need a practical example, think about that one lucky lady a LONG time ago that had slightly larger breasts than average. Now, the average breast size in the world is growing steadily. Evolution at work, people.
0
Reply
Male 332
And if anyone is still reading this, here`s a practical look at evolution.
Say I had a small mutation that gave me pointy ears (a little bumb of cartiledge or something). It makes me look a little odd but doesnt really hamper my ability to learn, eat, whatever.
Now, say I meet this nice girl and start churning out little pointy-eared children. They have the same flaw as me, but no distinct advantage or disadvantage. This goes on for several generations.
Then suddenly, pointy ears become HOT. All my great great great grandchildren are treated like gods, where before they had exactly the same survival chance as anyone else. They churn out more babies than non-pointy eared people, because they are `selected` more often for their pointy ears.
Slowly, a greater percentage of the population would develop pointy ears, until it became normal for humans to have pointy ears. At that point, peple with pointier ears would get selected as hot.
0
Reply
Male 332
Here`s something that defeats the 2nd law of thermodynamics argument: babies. Think about it, they only add to their own complexity (a big hunk of closely packed organic matter sitting in loosely arranged air molecules) by pumping food into themselves and making new cells.
The entropy tradeoff? Body heat escaped to the atmosphere, where some of it eventually gets lost to space and is thus unuseable because it is spread thin, and the glucose that they injested has now become CO2, a much simpler molecule.
This baby eventually becomes a much more complex adult, and what we did was add chemical energy the whole time. By the idea presented, adding energy to the baby would just break it down into its constituent molecules. This is obviously not the case.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Mwa ha haaa. Like it Overman. By the way, I`ve read most of Dawkins` books (more entertaining than the Bible for sure). You`ll like this, if you didn`t pick it up from my previous post...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXet...

0
Reply
Male 2,605
"My family thinks I`m crazy..."

You may very well be if you purport to be aware of the thoughts of your family. Sorry, but I felt this thread could do with a little humor.

0
Reply
Female 1,470
Kaoriel
Female, 13-17, Eastern US
499 Posts Wednesday, July 25, 2007 2:11:27 AM
"# Extrinsic Ear Muscles
* These three muscles most likely made it possible for prehominids to move their ears independently of their heads (again, like a cat or dog). We still have these muscles which is why most people can learn how to wiggle their ears."

Ooh, I can do that! My family thinks I`m crazy, but I can move my ears - in fact if I hear a loud noise behind me, my ears shift backwards so I can hear behind me, better. I don`t think it`s too big of a movement, though.

Sick! I want that

0
Reply
Male 2,605
Indeed I have read Dawkins` latest. I so admire his fluency of thought and the concise articulation with which he makes his arguments. I`m in the process of reading another of his books, The Blind Watchmaker. Have you yet discovered his website, RichardDawkins.net? The site touts to be `A Clear-thinking Oasis` and I think you`ll very much enjoy it if you have not already had the pleasure.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
You tell `em Overmann. Completely agree. Have you read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? He asks the same very valid question- If science cannot yet explain something, why is the answer "God" by default?

You might find the following interesting, which basically spells out the point you are making

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

0
Reply
Male 2,605
horn4231, you are describing my exact sentiments on religion and belief in a deity. You say that:

"We really need to admit that we (and science) cannot answer everything."

but then you contradict that statement by saying:

"There are many things that I explain by saying `God did it.`"

You seem uncomfortable with your ignorance such that you must label it differently or ascribe the blame to something else other than yourself. I freely admit I am ignorant of x number of things that science cannot provide answers for, but that doesn`t mean we cannot treat unknowable questions (is there a God? What are our origins?) scientifically in the meantime, namely that we should reject those hypotheses with insufficient evidence, regardless whether our desire to know such things can reconcile that rejection.

You`re right in that we should admit we know not everything, but that doesn`t mean we should ascribe our own ignorance to some other power beyond ourselves.

0
Reply
Male 4,246
I`m happy to admit that science can`t answer everything (yet), but that doesn`t mean God should get credit for what can`t be answered (yet). Isn`t it good enough to just say "I don`t know why this is," instead of saying "God made it this way."??
(bad puncuation, I know, but it was never my strongest point)
0
Reply
Male 87
davymid: i wish there were more people as humble as you in the world. people with humility are few and far between. i have much respect for you.

DbtG: You are exactly right. There are many things that I explain by saying "God did it." I do this because we don`t know everything. You probably consider this a weakness in the argument for Christianity, but it really isn`t. We really need to admit that we (and science) cannot answer everything. If you wish to discuss this any further please email me at [email protected] instead of posting on here, because I really don`t check this website too often.

0
Reply
Male 330
NeuralRu, I think some people get overwhelmed by the information. Like you said, it`s incredibly complex.

I think many Christians believe in God because it`s an easy explanation for incomprehensible things. Confused about something that happened? God did it. Wonder where something came from? God made it. etc...

People started believing in gods because they couldn`t explain or understand the changes in weather. And by becoming a Christian (or Jew or Muslim) in modern society, you don`t have to hurt your head trying to wrap it around rational thought. You can just say "God did it", cite the Bible and dismiss everybody else`s opinion.

0
Reply
Female 74
horn4231: How is it that being educated makes you less effective in making a point? Do you think people who are ignorant of science would be better at describing evolution? That makes absolutely no sense. The more you understand a concept, the better you are at assessing its validity. Don`t insult me, I`m a professional in the field of biology and chemistry, and I believe I`ve argued my side beautifully.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Horn4231

I have deleted the embarassing post. I know most Christians are good people, and I don`t want to tar all christians with the same brush. I am only arguing here against people who take the Bible literally.

I believe there is a place for religion in society, if taken in context. I just get pisseed off when people try to pass of pseudoscience like answersingenesis.org in a serious debate.

I apologise if I offended your faith, that was not my intention. I only ask that you respect my beliefs in return, which I`m sure you will do.

0
Reply
Male 87
davymid:
I call myself a Christian, and I am embarrassed at things like the article you posted. Please don`t judge the whole religion by the actions of a few. However, I am not any better than the people who do those things, because we are all sinners and we all fall short of the glory of God. All sins are the same in His eyes.
0
Reply
Male 87
this is the most off-the-wall creation vs evolution argument ive ever seen. after reading this, i have come to the realization that: the more years you have studied evolution/biochemical thermodynamics, etc, the less able you are to make an actual point. yet, you gain the ability and right to call others ignorant for believing things you don`t.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ninjachibi,

Please stop spouting your brand of bulllpoo. I`ve got a PhD in geology. What have you got? A favourite tag on Answersingenesis.org and high school diploma. Get educated before you decide to "preach"

0
Reply
Male 2,605
NinjaChibi, I admit I am having some difficulty following your line of reasoning. The way you phrased your post it sounded as if the only form of energy compatible with life is solar energy. Surely this is not what you are trying to insinuate?
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi:
No humans are not photosynthetic, obviously. Where the hell do you think we get our energy? It`s called FOOD. Everything we eat gets broken down into glucose which is broken down in glycolysis to start oxidative phoshporylation to generate adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the energy currency of the cell. Sustenance is what provides the energy for cells to develop and replicated, and mutations occur during the replication process. NONE of this violates the laws of thermodynamics. I have been studying biochemical thermodynamics for several years, and there has never been a biochemical reaction observed that doesn`t follow those laws... and mutation of genetic code is one of them.
0
Reply
Female 74
Thanks Snoogans, I`m glad you gained some knowledge from my posts.

Hbah427: First of all, it is thought that the original "cosmic soup" of the big bang was comprised of random neutrons and protons that fused to form deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen)and helium. Afterwhich, the helium and hydrogen could transmute into the other elements, and heavier elements are thought to have been synthesized in stars. If you don`t know what transmutation of elements is, look it up.
This is all theoretical of course, but there is evidence... but a point I`d like to make is this: when people don`t understand something, why do they feel compelled to ASSUME a supreme being is involved? Why are human beings so afraid to accept that they just don`t know?

0
Reply
Male 91
Overmann: I was merely pointing out the fact that the theory of evolution does not correspond with the laws of thermodynamics. I was asking how evolution gets around such a thing. But the fact is that I have educated myself. The laws of entropy induces this statement:
The open systems argument does not help evolution. Raw energy cannot generate the specified complex information in living things. Undirected energy just speeds up destruction. Just standing out in the sun won’t make you more complex—the human body lacks the mechanisms to harness raw solar energy. If you stood in the sun too long, you would get skin cancer, because the sun’s undirected energy will cause mutations. (Mutations are copying errors in the genes that nearly always lose information). Similarly, undirected energy flow through an alleged primordial soup will break down the complex molecules of life faster than they are formed.
0
Reply
Male 32
listen people, if you look at evloution at the whole basis of the "beginning of time" then you see what was the first element?.......THATS RIGHT... Hydrogen, having 1 electron, and no protons
then we see helium, 2 electrons, and 1 proton, so...where did the 1 proton come from, Air? nope. GOD!!!!!
0
Reply
Male 2,605
NinjaChibi, you are doing yourself an injustice by not educating yourself. It is not anyone else`s responsibility but your own to ensure you receive the most accurate information available and if that means enrolling in all the pertinent classes, so be it. No one here owes you anything; I rather think they are simply being polite in indicating your ignorance so that you can do what is in your best interest. Disputing long tested and established theories does more harm to your respectability and character than anything else.
0
Reply
Male 869
NijaChibi....not to get sucked into this discussion, but what I do remember about the law of entropy is that when energy is created some of that energy is lost into vastness of space. This will continue to occur until nothing is left. Or something like that =)
0
Reply
Male 869
First off, I don`t care what anyone else believes in....just don`t bug me about it and I won`t bug you about it. It`s a good system, it works. I just thought I would pass this article along for those who question evolution. It`s about the Pope and him admitting evidence for evolution. I personally believe in evolution. You can absolutely see it first hand. I`m not a doctor or a scientist, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. NeurolRu....you sound like a very intelligent person. I feel like I owe you some money or something from reading your posts. It was like a free class in genetics. I have a degree in environmental science and hydrology and work in a lab with microbes that we see in water and wastewater treatment. Thank you for the knowledge. Oh and I also believe in aliens (yes I know I`m crazy, I have the papers to prove it)! Article
0
Reply
Male 91
Would one of you please answer this. Look it up and explain to me how the THEORY of evolution works with the second law of thermodynamics, the law of entropy? Anyone? hmm?
0
Reply
Male 330
99% of people who don`t believe in evolution do not understand it. I don`t understand all of it, because it is incredibly complex. But I understand enough.

Anybody who says anything like "Humans did not come from monkeys" isn`t worth explaining anything to, since they obviously don`t have the slightest idea what evolution really is.

0
Reply
Male 87
Evolution might have happened....but why are some people so sure that God didn`t create the first cells?

The Lord knows I don`t have all the answers, sometimes I think that the theory of "7 days=billions of years" is the most logical. I guess Ill just have to wait until my earthly body dies to find out.

0
Reply
Female 74
Everyone: please stop arguing concepts you don`t truly understand. If you haven`t taken any biology or genetics courses, there is no way you can possibly comprehend the complexity of the issue. And I can tell many of you have not, because of the nauseating miss-use of the terminology. It is fool hearty for one to dismiss a theory when they cannot grasp the foundation of it. If you lack the knowledge to understand mutational processes, and the process of evolution (and believe me, it is much more detailed and intricate than you probably think), then rejection of the theory is based off of ignorance, not evidence.
0
Reply
Male 2,605
People, stop citing answersingenesis.org as a valid source; it`s utter bunk. You`d figure the oxymoronic web address would be enough?
0
Reply
Male 13
"for a dinosaur to ebcome a bird, the dinosaur woudl need more then just small mutations, it would need new biochemical information, since it lacks the information of the many factors of feathers, which aloen coutns for billions of extra dna, not to say the oils needed for flight."

You seem to have a problem with this. This is totally possible. It`s just very hard to imagine the scale of billions of years and the kind of changes that happen.

You say it lacks information for feathers. I say you need to take a genetics course, because I`m not going to teach you a semester`s worth of reasons why that is, for lack of a better term, a pile of BSfffff

0
Reply
Male 13
"for a dinosaur to ebcome a bird, the dinosaur woudl need more then just small mutations, it would need new biochemical information, since it lacks the information of the many factors of feathers, which aloen coutns for billions of extra dna, not to say the oils needed for flight."

You seem to have a problem with this. This is totally possible. It`s just very hard to imagine the scale of billions of years and the kind of changes that happen.

You say it lacks information for feathers. I say you need to take a genetics course, because I`m not going to teach you a semester`s worth of reasons why that is, for lack of a better term, a pile of BS.

0
Reply
Male 13
>_> that arrow should be pointing to the middle. This place needs an edit function, methinks.
0
Reply
Male 263
answersingenesis.org
0
Reply
Male 263
just because they dont thinkn there is a reaosn for things, doe snot make it so. many so called vestigial appendages once thought to be useless, wer elater foudn to have important roles in the body.

second, this isnt about chair to table, its about chair to car, oen is wood one is metal, impossible.

for a dinosaur to ebcome a bird, the dinosaur woudl need more then just small mutations, it would need new biochemical information, since it lacks the information of the many factors of feathers, which aloen coutns for billions of extra dna, not to say the oils needed for flight.


the sad thing is, there is no real proof that one species change sinto another. not a single opunce of real scientific data, all we have is proof of speciation, kinds changing, but staying the same thing.

vestigial organs, evenm iof it were true, is not proof of evolution, lack of information in the opposite of evoltion, which is gaining new information.


0
Reply
Male 13
>_> that arrow should be pointing to the middle. This place needs an edit function, methinks.
0
Reply
Male 13
at you don`t understand genetics. You`re thinking of genes and DNA as being an instruction booklet. In your mind, it`s "How can this instruction book for a chair become instructions for a table? Where is the table information coming from?". The answer is, over an epicly long amount of time, with an even more epic amount of mutations, eventually, that chair becomes a shorter chair (still useful), a footrest (still useful), a nightstand (still useful) and finally a table. And please, please, don`t ask what happens between a chair and a footrest. Look at my previous post, there is no "point A-and-a-half" with a half-chair half-footrest.

Fish--------------------------------Lizard.
^
|
This is not a half-fish, half-lizard.

0
Reply
Male 13
The problem with some people is that they think of evolution as going from point A (fish) to point B (lizard). This, in their minds, creates a point halfway through of some horrible fishlizard hellspawn that couldn`t possibly survive. It only has half a lung, right? Wrong. Evolution occurs mutation by mutation. There is no plan saying "Ok, this fish is going to become a lizard, flip-book style, GO! pewpewpew!".

Its just like vestigial organs; they arent useless, they just arent what they USED to be. You need your toes. Right now,we use them for balance. But we can`t hang upside-down on a tree with them anymore. Vestigial?Useless. Vestigial=No longer used for original function

And another thing. Mutations can occur where a single nucleotide is inserted, which, though often really screws things up be desynchronizing the codons, is ADDING a gene.

Which is different than adding "information". This concept of "arm information" is unfounded and shows th

0
Reply
Female 93
Ugh. Evolution is such a load of crap.
0
Reply
Female 428
I bet there is a major argument going on in the comments about religion...
0
Reply
Female 272
^ My friend was born without earlobes (instead of going down and out, her ears go upwards and in, it`s kinda weird) and she`s perfectly fine, i think. I expect a lot of people would like to keep them for earrings though..
0
Reply
Female 89
They left out some stuff.
Like earlobes. Do we honestly need them?
I only have two wisdom teeth, so does that mean I am half way to being evolved?
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ninja,

I`ve read the Bible. I challenge you to read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, with an open mind, if you have the courage. But to a dyed-in-the-wool hardcore brainwashed creationist like you, there`s probably no point.

Listen man, whatever helps you sleep at night. Just stop trying to wedge "faith" into a serious scientific discussion about evolution.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ninja,

At last you show your true colours, a faith-based creationist who would rather believe a 2500 year old book of fables over observable science. Need a "transitional species"? Try Archaeopteryx, transition from lizard to bird.

As a professional geologist, creationism is an affront to science. I work for an oil company, finding oil. If I based my search on Noah`s flood and a 6000 year old earth I would not find anything & lose my job pretty fast. Next time you put gas in your car, thank your Lord God (who was a nasty [email protected] by the way if you actually read the Old Testament) that some people out there don`t believe in Genesis but who base their profession on science.

Please stop propagating the myth that there`s a debate among the respected scientific community between creationism and evolution. There is no such debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent...

0
Reply
Male 91
Haha, yes it`s true. We won`t get anywhere.
But think about this. It`s basically one of two options. Either:
In the beginning God.
or
In the beginning nothing.
0
Reply
Male 330
My bad on the spelling errors.

...

But I`m sick of this. You did bring some valid arguments, but in the end neither of us is going to budge. It all boils down to trusting either Bibles or textbooks.

0
Reply
Male 91
Spelling errors: "Sceptic" and "Sophistocated".
--
I looked at the part where it said Sophisticated. And the spelling is correct. And sceptic is the British spelling of skeptic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sceptic
0
Reply
Male 330
Spelling errors: "Sceptic" and "Sophistocated".

Sorry, Ninja, I gotta go to work. But I`ll be back in a few hours.

0
Reply
Male 330
And besides, all the sites you`re posting are using nonsense logic like:
"The universe (including time itself) can be shown to have had a beginning.
It is unreasonable to believe something could begin to exist without a cause.
The universe therefore requires a cause, just as Genesis 1:1 and Romans 1:20 teach.
God, as creator of time, is outside of time. Since therefore He has no beginning in time, He has always existed, so doesn’t need a cause."

What the hell?
Real logic: It is unreasonable to believe that something can exist without having a beginning.

0
Reply
Male 91
And what spelling error?
0
Reply
Male 91
Sorry DBtG, that must have come across differently. I wasn`t saying science wasn`t based on fact. But you are presuming that evolution is science. Which it isn`t, it`s a view on it. I was stating that science is the evidence. And the Bible is based on that. The Bible is a way of interpreting science. As I stated earlier:
evolutionary theory presumptions -> science/evidence/facts. <- Biblical presumptions

0
Reply
Male 330
NinjaChibi, I don`t trust sources with spelling errors.
0
Reply
Male 330
Observable phenomena capable of being tested for validity under similar circumstances by other researchers. That is what science is.

An invisible man in the sky made everything there ever was or ever will be in six days. That is creationism.

0
Reply
Male 91
For people who are wondering "Who created God?"
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v12/i...

" The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space. Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time—God is ‘the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity’ (Is. 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause."

0
Reply
Male 330
Are you f*cking kidding me about science being based on data and Creationism based on faith? Are you seriously requesting evidence that science is based on evidence? I enjoy intelligent debates, but that just about made my head explode.
0
Reply
Male 330
Using half-lives to date things isn`t restricted to carbon or once-living organisms. To determine the age of the Earth, scientists have used zircon, as well as many other non-half-life methods.

Shown here.

0
Reply
Male 91
But Creationism is NOT A SCIENCE. SCIENCE IS BASED ON DATA. CREATIONISM IS BASED ON FAITH.
--
Where did you read this? or are you just presuming?
0
Reply
Male 91
I think you should see the second law of thermodynamics too.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/370...
0
Reply
Male 91
because there is a vast amount of information I will provide links to what I cannot just simple type out.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002...
0
Reply
Male 330
I don`t think there`s any problem with believing in God or having faith in the Bible, but "God said..." or "The Bible says..." don`t hold up as scientific evidence.

And if you still believe in Creationism, more power to you. I happen to disagree. But Creationism is NOT A SCIENCE. SCIENCE IS BASED ON DATA. CREATIONISM IS BASED ON FAITH.

0
Reply
Male 330
Facts are facts--there aren`t multiple interpretations of hardcore evidence.

For instance, if carbon dating puts the Earth to be about 4.53 billion years old, you can`t say "I interpret that to mean that the Earth is a few thousand years old".

0
Reply
Male 330
The only problem is the way those presuppositions are taken.

Scientists gather evidence, then form a conclusion.
Creationists have a conclusion, then backpedal to find evidence to support it.

But I will read your side of the argument with an open mind since you did the same.

0
Reply
Male 91
(also called axioms). This becomes especially relevant when dealing with past events."
0
Reply
Male 91
Alright. You have given me everything on your theory and I have listened. Would you do me the honor of listening to my side?
Read this.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation...
And check out everything about creation on that site.
I think we were having trouble getting our ideas across because:
"Creationists and evolutionists, Christians and non-Christians all have the same evidence—the same facts. Think about it: we all have the same earth, the same fossil layers, the same animals and plants, the same stars—the facts are all the same.

The difference is in the way we all interpret the facts. And why do we interpret facts differently? Because we start with different presuppositions. These are things that are assumed to be true, without being able to prove them. These then become the basis for other conclusions. All reasoning is based on presuppositions (also called

0
Reply
Male 197
Arm and leg hair is to protect us from mosquito’s
0
Reply
Male 3,369
NinjaChibi

I quote:
If you squish a mosquito all the genetic coding for it is there, but the mosquito is dead. You have taken an organized being and, by squishing it, you deorganized it. Now you are telling me that if I left that bug on the wall for billions of years it would eventually organize itself into a being.
--------------------------------------------------

That is the stupidest thing I`ve heard EVER!. Your argument claims a single organism cant change into another. Of course it cant u muppet! I cant suddenly sprout wings now can I! Thats not evoulution. its not about a single organism. What i would like you to answer is this..30 generations of mice bred in lab. Do you think, the original pair of mice have EXACTLY the same set of genes the latest offspring have? Of course not. My children do not have the genes as me. They have a mixture of my genetic code and my partners. And you know what...its PROVEN that the genetic code can get messed up.

0
Reply
Male 330
^^"non-nice individuals" was supposed to be "a$$holes".
0
Reply
Male 330
Thank you for sticking around, NinjaChibi. Most people are non-nice individuals and won`t even listen to others` opinions.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
>> All I`m seeing now is lame ass arguments from you NinjaChibi. You want proof...Genetic engineering is man made, therefor not worth mentioning. We can and have proven that outside infulences can "damage" genes. Polutants, radiation etc. The resulting "damage" could be good or bad...but dont come back with "where`s your proof" when there is a libary full of information about it at your fingertips. No we cant fully prove evoultion...but we can and have obeserved many things which support it.
0
Reply
Male 330
"Every species on earth produces only copies of itself, never a new species."

New species only come after thousands of mutations and millions of years. Of course no scientist could directly witness a single evolution, it happens so gradually it`s barely noticeable.

That is what evolution is.

0
Reply
Male 3,369
NinjaChibi

I quote:
If you squish a mosquito all the genetic coding for it is there, but the mosquito is dead. You have taken an organized being and, by squishing it, you deorganized it. Now you are telling me that if I left that bug on the wall for billions of years it would eventually organize itself into a being.
--------------------------------------------------

That is the stupidest thing I`ve heard EVER!. Your argument claims a single organism cant change into another. Of course it cant u muppet! I cant suddenly sprout wings now can I! Thats not evoulution. its not about a single organism. What i would like you to answer is this..30 generations of mice bred in lab. Do you think, the original pair of mice have EXACTLY the same set of genes the latest offspring have? Of course not. My children do not have the genes as me. They have a mixture of my genetic code and my partners. And you know what...its PROVEN that the genetic code can get messed up.

0
Reply
Male 91
Granted. Now we are still just dealing with one species. Answer for me this.
Scientists have never observed the evolution of one species into another species. Every species on earth produces only copies of itself, never a new species.
0
Reply
Male 330
And for proof of it happening with an animal--I checked back and slurba has actually mentioned it twice.

"a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes".

and here is the evidence. Unbiased. Factual. Indisputable.


Proof for NinjaChibi

0
Reply
Male 330
There are sections dealing with mutations and Natural selection toward the bottom.

I know Wikipedia isn`t 100% acurate all the time, but it`s a start while I find more reliable links that verify the evidence I`ve brought.

0
Reply
Male 330
Okay, you win, I haven`t officially cited any resources, and props to you for actually sticking around and listening to me.

So lets start with this.

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

0
Reply
Male 91
What I was looking for, was where this thing has actually happened in an animal.
And so I won`t be considered "stubborn" I will also look it up. And how is listening to your entire theory being stubborn? Other than the fact that you aren`t providing your resources. So therefore I have no reason to believe them to be valid.
0
Reply
Male 330
And besides, nobody ever said there was PROOF of evolution--just lots and lots of data and evidence suggesting it.

There is, however, proof of codons and DNA--just like there`s proof of hair and skin and teeth. It`s visible. It`s there.

0
Reply
Male 330
Look it up yourself, you lazy ass. If you`re not willing to do ANY research on the subject yourself, I`m not going to bother trying to debate with you because A) you`re way too stubborn and B) you obviously have no information to back up your side of the argument.
0
Reply
Male 91
Uh, where is the proof? Again you are just telling me this. I would have to take your word on it. I`m not going to believe something because "everyone is doing it" Send me a link. send me any thing that says this. And note: just because something is taught everywhere doesn`t make it necessarily true.
0
Reply
Male 330
It`s not hypothetical. If geneticists hadn`t proven the existence of those tiny sequences of DNA, they wouldn`t be such a major part of biology or genetics classes. That`s like asking for proof of the existence of cells. Those code mutations (duplication, inversion, etc...) are frequently and consistently observed in small generation-span organisms like fission yeast... like NeurolRu MENTIONED ALREADY.

Why don`t you learn a little bit about genetic sciences and get back to me?

0
Reply
Male 91
"And geneticists have PROVEN this!"
Show me. Show me where this has happened. Not just hypothetically.
0
Reply
Male 330
And geneticists have PROVEN this!
0
Reply
Male 330
How `bout you read the damn posts, dumbass!

The basic pieces of code that make up DNA come in four types: G A T and C. THOSE are what are copied and deleted not "information" as a whole--the DNA.

GATCGAGA may be the code for a bump-arm. Copy part of it, and you have GAGATCGAGA--a completely different code, maybe for an arm.

Keep in mind there are trillions of these little sections in EACH and EVERY strand of DNA! Is any of this getting through to you?

0
Reply
Male 91
They never answered it. There isn`t any evidence where a mutation has added more information. Or completely changed to an entirely new code. They are still making presumptions on how it works without any visual or reproducible proof. Sure they show me a fish and then another species of fish with some different lungs. But still the lungfish is still a fish. It isn`t a lizard. It`s STILL the same species just a different variety.
You can breed together a lion and a tiger, and it produces one very big and powerful animal. But it`s STILL a CAT. You cant breed together a wolf and a tiger, it would obviously die. Their codes would conflict and the animal would die. Is ANYONE seeing where I am coming from? It`s not like a fishes codes and a lizards codes are the same as you presume, they are DIFFERENT. Thats what makes them fish OR lizards.
0
Reply
Male 330
NinjaChibi
Did you even read all the information slurba and NeurolRu posted? You keep asking the same damn question that`s already been answered! Is it really that difficult to understand?
0
Reply
Male 91
The_Maddog
If you squish a mosquito all the genetic coding for it is there, but the mosquito is dead. You have taken an organized being and, by squishing it, you deorganized it. Now you are telling me that if I left that bug on the wall for billions of years it would eventually organize itself into a being.

Also, I don`t see how a fish`s coding could change into a more complex genetic code. A lot of animals are definitely more complex than fish. Basically what you are saying is that DNA can evolve into a more powerful DNA through mutation. Which is saying that information was added rather than deleted or copied. And that just doesn`t work.

0
Reply
Male 3,369
NinjaChibi
I never clamied a mutation was a new creation. I`d say read and understand what I`m saying but that seems like you dont get it! A mutation is exactly that. A slight mutation. It is a genetic defect. That defect to the "arm" in this case does not invoke a wing..It may be slightly longer fingers or a slight webbing of the skin. This, if not detrimental to the organisms exitiance will allow it to breed and those genes will be passed onto to a new generation...At somepoint in the future another genetic defect will occur, so on and so forth. Its small, its sutle and you dont notice it. So through time you may have started with a small rodent but end up with a squirle that can glide from tree to tree. this may take thousands of generations to occur but it occurs. You blatently do not understand genetics or evolution. You keep arguing behind this creation concept of genetics which simply does not exist.Its change not creation. Makes a whole hell of a diffrence.
0
Reply
Male 300
WTF!?!? I didn`t see tonsils on that list. . .and I had mine removed, aaarrrgggh, so there was a purpose for tonsils!! That is a load of poo!!
0
Reply
Male 91
The_maddog: I feel like I must repeat myself. Whenever a mutation occurs it is never a creation.
For the evolution to occur the mutation MUST create new information. Take a look at this link. mutations are only ones of lost information (deletion) duplicated information, inverted information etc. There is no NEW information produced.
This means that even if you leave an arm for billions of years it will never become a wing because new information would have to be added. And by the characteristics of mutations, this clearly isn`t possible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Types...
0
Reply
Male 3,369
>>

Your thinking about it totally wrong. It takes numerous generations, slight mutations and an unknown amount of failed evolutionary dead ends. Whilst "survival of the fittests" isnt the best term it sums it up. If the mutation is detrimental to the organisms existance it will most likely be eaten by a predator. Only those that survive get to pass on their gene`s.

0
Reply
Male 3,369
Evolution:
All life forms (species) have developed from other species.
All living things are related to one another to varying degrees through common descent (share common ancestors).
All life on Earth has a common origin. In other words, that in the distant past, there once existed an original life form and that this life form gave rise to all subsequent life forms.
The process by which one species evolves into another involves random heritable genetic mutations (changes), some of which are more likely to spread and persist in a gene pool than others. Mutations that result in a survival advantage for organisms that possess them, are more likely to spread and persist than mutations that do not result in a survival advantage and/or that result in a survival disadvantage.

What I find most amusing is silly ass posts from people saying "You cannot make a make a wing if the only genes you have are for arms". Of course an arm wont turn into a wing overnight. >

0
Reply
Male 223
In The red Corner Weighing In A Nothing is GOD

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND
IN THE BLUE CORNER ; DARWIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WANT THIS TO BE A CLEAN FIGHT...

drat off

0
Reply
Female 10
one thing I noticed on that link posted a few comments back was that in order for mutations to occur, the organism must already have those genes. You cannot make a make a wing if the only genes you have are for arms.
0
Reply
Female 10
if we were apes, then why are there still apes. Are they people who didn`t make it? lol
0
Reply
Male 132
0
Reply
Male 91
And thanks slurba! But could I add you to msn or something?
0
Reply
Male 91
NeourolRu: you still didnt say whether your statement was proven fact or hypothetical. And saying that "I don`t understand genetics" is false when I do understand. Now if your statement is proven fact then yeah, I will have something to learn. But I doubt that your statement is proven fact because I have never seen it and i don`t think anyone has.
0
Reply
Male 132
I have to go also, but I think you understand it now. Notice also that evolution doesn`t neccesarily have to interfere with personal beliefs. I know many people that are Christians and firm believers in evolution.
0
Reply
Female 74
And finally, yes NinjaChibi, they have showed that this happens. Good night.
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: Lets say you have the codon GAC, and that codon becomes duplicated so you have GACGAC, then a point mutation occurs during replication that turns the A into a T, you now have GACGTC... voila...new information.
Okay fellas, I`d love to stay and debate this, but I have my own research to work on. Ninjachibi, I don`t think you have enough of a base knowledge to truly understand genetics and why evolution makes sense. I suggest you take a genetics course if you want to explore the subject further. Good night and its been fun.
0
Reply
Male 132
I`m happy that you consider evolution and natural selection, and ask about it. Most people usually just say "it`s wrong" then leave. The world needs more people like you.
0
Reply
Male 91
neurolru: has this happened or are you being hypothetical?
0
Reply
Male 91
Slurba: it was deletion and alteration not creation.

Edit: okay =]

0
Reply
Male 132
Ninja, this will be my 3rd time posting it: "For example, a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes." From wikipedia. Basically, people have HIV resistance because of altered genes.

I can`t show you where it made more genes, I know little on that subject, but ^ is an example where a mutation helps an animal.

0
Reply
Male 91
Slurba: it was deletion and alteration not creation.
0
Reply
Female 74
Lets say you have the codon GAC, and that codon becomes duplicated so you have GACGAC, then a point mutation occurs during replication that turns the A into a T, you now have GACGTC... voila...new information.
0
Reply
Male 91
"how animals ->can<- have advantageous mutations:"
Do they? show me where they have. show me where a mutation has created more information. With slurba`s wiki link it showed that mutations were either deletion, duplication, inversion, and translocation. but NOT creation.
0
Reply
Female 74
And yes, duplications of genes can occur, and subsequent mutations in those duplications can increase the genome of a species. Hence why humans have 3 billion base pairs, and fission yeast only have about 13.8 million. Also, transposons are moving elements of the genome that can be copied and moved to other chromosomes, and this mechanism can cause significant genetic variation.
0
Reply
Male 91
That snake with two heads is a problem in reproduction, not genetics.
---
I will resort to my previous statement. There was no new information in the mutation. There is resistance because of altered genes.
0
Reply
Female 74
Sorry for the repost, but NinjaChibi, this was a great example of how animals can have advantageous mutations:
Let me make this more visual for you. Imagine a fish in an environment where food is diminishing in water but is increasing on land. This fish has offspring that have gills that are able to take oxygen from the air, but just a little bit. So they can spend more time out of water to get food. These fish may have offspring that have gills that become even more lung-like etc. Gradually, these fish that can access the food on land are more likely to survive and pass the rudimentary lungs to the subsequent generations. Again its a very gradual process, and as slurba pointed out, its very much more treelike, but this is just an example.
So in the long run, the mutation that made gills more lung-like in the example was a beneficial mutation.
0
Reply
Male 132
Copying a part of a gene and placing it somewhere else can lead to results like a fish with toelike fins.
0
Reply
Male 132
That snake with two heads is a problem in reproduction, not genetics.

I just gave you one, lemme say it again: "For example, a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes." From wikipedia. Basically, people have HIV resistance because of altered genes.

0
Reply
Male 91
slurba: note that there is still no new information added. it is deleted, subtracted and copied but not produced. And evolution requires that new information be produced in the mutation.
0
Reply
Male 91
Show me some facts where mutations have been helpful to any animal/human species not a bacteria. I have seen a snake with two heads, provided that the snake lived long enough to reproduce, the offspring would be even worse. you understand. thats how life works. there are examples of this. No new information was added in the mutation.
0
Reply
Female 74
I`m not sure about the genetic mechanism behind wisdom teeth, but I suspect its a Mendelian trait because of what Slurba said about his parents. There is something called alleles, which are different versions of one gene. In simple terms, some are dominant (the mask other genes) and others are recessive (they get masked). If purple fur is recessive and brown fur is dominant, the organism would need TWO recessive alleles to have purple fur. Therefore two brown parents could have purple offspring if they were both "carriers" of the recessive allele and have the other one dominant. Does that make sense? In this way, not everything trait is passed down, and that`s why things like red hair can seem to spring up out of nowhere.
0
Reply
Male 132
Ninja, look at this page to see different types of mutations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Types...

Notice it`s not ONLY taking things away, however, that still is a part of it.

0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: Sorry, I`ve sorta gotten distracted... okay, I`m not sure how else to put it. I thought the "A fish" "D fish" "A+++ semi lizard" thing would spell it out for you. Are you sure you understand the premise behind mutations? Like I`ve said, some do nothing, some do something (good or bad). You can pass down any mutation, good or bad or neutral, if you happen to survive long enough to pass it down. I`d like to help you understand the mechanism.
0
Reply
Male 91
So yes, you have stated that there are variations, but not that you have LOST information in the fact that you don`t have wisdom teeth. Understand?
0
Reply
Male 132
I don`t know everything about DNA and genes, I mainly focus on evolution as in naturaly selection. NeurolRu obviously has more knowledge on that subject.
0
Reply
Male 132
No. That`s another thing about genes, nothing is definite. My parents both have wisdom teeth, i don`t. A small variation, but still a valid point.
0
Reply
Male 91
slurba: you are basically saying that if i have another rib that information for the rib would be passed onto my son. therefore all his children would have 13 ribs and so on and so forth
0
Reply
Male 330
I hate idiots.
0
Reply
Male 132
dbtg, don`t even reply to people like him... they`re hopeless.

Ninja, that is something like a birth defect. If you have something different in your body from genetics, like say.. another rib, then that can be passed onto your offsprring.

0
Reply
Female 74
Ste08: you obviously haven`t read the discussion... if it were an ASSUMPTION we wouldn`t be bringing volumes of valid scientific evidence to the table. I don`t assume evolution is real, I INFER that it is real based on this evidence, and the fact that you can WATCH it happen, and that I work with it in a lab every day.
0
Reply
Male 91
I`ll explain better, you don`t just have a "large scale" everything when you look closer is a small scale.
0
Reply
Male 91
apologize that was still small scale.
0
Reply
Male 330
Also, learn to spell.
0
Reply
Male 330
Ste08, did you actually read any of the posts?
0
Reply
Male 91
okay small scale then, a fish for some reason has a bump on its side, now that fish doesn`t pass on that bump to it`s offspring. its a mutation just like i wouldnt pass on an extra limb or a bump to my son. understand?
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: I`d like to ask, have you ever taken a genetics course? There are multitudes of things regarding the genetic code one must understand before mutation and gene expression and phenotypic characteristics will ever make sense.
0
Reply
Male 132
You`re thinking small scale. Evolution from a fish to an amphibian didn`t happen in 10 generations. It happened in trillions over entire populations.
0
Reply
Male 91
yes but a fish doesn`t genetically grow legs.
0
Reply
Male 132
I think he means if you have better muscles from a mutation.
0
Reply
Male 132
Yes, it does if its genetic. Like wisdom teeth. Why do you think all the giraffes have really long necks? It`s in their DNA. Why are gorrilas so powerful(generally)? It`s in their DNA.
0
Reply
Male 330
Extra ribs and extra strength are two completely different things.
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: there is absolutely real-time proof in micro-organisms. You sequence the genome of fission yeast in one generation, and then sequence the next, you will undoubtedly find subtle changes (I know because I`ve done this). And they have found the same thing in gametogenesis (the production of sperm and egg).
0
Reply
Male 91
slurba: a very small portion, so small in fact that it would only happen in a few individuals, and then why would that gene be passed on? Say if I for some reason grow an extra rib. Would my son have an extra rib too? or say if i had extra ordinary strength does that mean my son would have it? no, no it doesnt.
0
Reply
Male 132
I believe there is natural selection. But that is just a squirrels fur. And if purple fur is disadvantageous what about all those fish with almost feet? wouldn`t they die off BEFORE they could reproduce?
----
The feet were webbed, alowing them to still swim. If one was born without webbed feet (and one probably was) it would die off. The ones with webbed feet lived and had offspring.

It`s quite simple really...

0
Reply
Male 91
neurolru: sorry, I can`t say anything to that because it is spontaneous and random and there is no real time proof for it happening. It`s hypothetical.
0
Reply
Male 132
Here`s another good example, taken directly off wikipedia: "A very small percentage of all mutations actually have a positive effect. These mutations lead to new versions of proteins that help an organism and its future generations better adapt to changes in their environment. For example, a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes."
0
Reply
Male 91
I believe there is natural selection. But that is just a squirrels fur. And if purple fur is disadvantageous what about all those fish with almost feet? wouldn`t they die off BEFORE they could reproduce?
0
Reply
Female 74
I think we need to be more clear over what mutations actually are. The type of mutations we are concerned with here, are the random and spontaneous mutations that occur in mitosis or meiosis (depending on the species). They can be a single nucleotide change, or an entire codon (a three nucleotide cluster) can be deleted, inverted, replaced, or even duplicated. In rare cases, larger changes can occur. If a codon is altered, the amino acid it codes for may be different but make no impact, it may be the same amino acid, or it may be different and make an impact. This last one is called a nonsense mutation and this is what we are talking about. The change in amino acid may be deleterious, but it also may be advantageous if the resulting protein can bind more effectively to whatever it interacts with. Any questions?
0
Reply
Male 132
Ok. How about this one: Squirrels color of fur. Since the genes allow the fur to be any color, but all squirrels have fur that is usually close to the color of their surroundings, this allows them to live and reproduce there.

Lets say a squirrel with purple fur is born. How long do you think its going to survive?

0
Reply
Male 91
Slurba: there is no proof that the lungfishes "lungs" were mutations though.
0
Reply
Male 132
Slurba: Show me a real example where a mutation wasn`t harmful to the host.
----
That`s simple. Since a mutation is any change in the organism`s genes, sometimes they happen to be helpful. I`ll keep it on topic of the whole fish thing, and say the lungfishes lungs.
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: The subject of how DNA first formed is very controversial. It`s really hard to say since we only have a vague idea of what conditions were like when life first formed. The idea is that many molecules formed from random interactions (electrostatic interactions, hydrogen bonding, Vander Walls interactions, etc..). There is a lot of debate over the steps that lead to the complex molecule DNA, but it is suggested that it formed gradually, much like species do, and at some point gave a drop of water surrounded by a phospholipid bilayer an advantage, and this may have been how the first cell formed. Like I said though, its very shaky ground.
0
Reply
Male 91
Slurba: Show me a real example where a mutation wasn`t harmful to the host.
0
Reply
Male 132
Mutations aren`t always from lack of information.
0
Reply
Male 91
But mutations are always caused by a lack of information. What you are saying is that these mutations created information.

davymid: Add me to msn and I would be happy to explain, but at the moment we are discussing evolution.

0
Reply
Male 1,386
i agree with atomic muffin (first page)
0
Reply
Male 132
Did I misunderstand what you said? Are you asking where DNA comes from, or who "puts" it there?
0
Reply
Male 132
Well, I never said a God(s) didn`t exsist. I`m argueing evolution, which is when DNA is altered and changed to make a different organism. You`re asking where this came from. No one really knows. It`s like asking where the universe came from, or if there is a god, who made him/her.
0
Reply
Female 74
The same place every phenotypic trait comes from: the genetic code. Its another gradual product of evolution (like you said earlier, fish-->fish with bump-->fish with small leg and so on). I could go into great deal about gene expression and protein synthesis and interaction, but I`d have to write a novel. Basically the genome grew larger over time (included more information) and directed tissue to become part of a leg... and this occurred because of evolution.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ninja,

Still waiting for that alternative, better hypothesis...

0
Reply
Male 91
yes i realize that it is DNA... but where did the dna come from? are you saying that raw information as complex as DNA just came to be?
0
Reply
Male 330
NinjaChibi, are you drunk?
0
Reply
Male 132
DNA. That`s where all the information comes from. The same reason some people don`t have wisdom teeth: they lack that gene to create it.
0
Reply
Male 91
Where did the information for ANYTHING come from?
0
Reply
Male 91
Okay, basically where did the information for a leg come from?
0
Reply
Female 74
NInjaChibi: remember a thousand years is still a blink of an eye next to the billions of years of evolution that has occurred. And I believe davymid pointed out that movement of techtonic plates, hurricanes, numerous forms of erosion, etc.. interfere with the formation of fossils. So if the environment has qualities that impedes fossil formation, we simply wouldn`t find too much. But even still, we have examples of intermediate species.
0
Reply
Male 132
I don`t quite understand what you`re asking...? Maybe you should read through this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introductio...

Skip down to the molecular part.

0
Reply
Female 35
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. Matthew 18:18-20


I laughed at that...(sorry skiped a few pages), I have a question Christian...who said that Jesus ruled heven and earth...Jesus? wait...that means he says he has control, but what do you know? Have you seen your god or any "signs"?

I have no reason to belive in your petty belives..but if you want to fine...but don`t push it on people

0
Reply
Male 132
Her theory makes perfect sense. They survived long enough to change because they had good genes. Good genes = better chance of life = babies.
0
Reply
Male 91
slurba: then what did they do? they just did it? for what cause? and name one that was beneficial to a fishes way of life?
0
Reply
Male 91
NeurolRu: but they must have had to survive thousands of years to slowly get that new advancement. Your theory still isn`t making sense.
0
Reply
Male 132
They don`t choose to change, its a simply mutation that does it. It CAN be lethal, but sometimes its helpful. This is called an adaptation. Saying they "chose" to evolve would defy everything that evolution is based on.
0
Reply
Male 91
davy: that is a newt. it`s how it is. it isn`t an intermediate stage between a fish and lizard. It`s a lizard. They are programmed to do that. How did they learn how to do that?
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: That`s great you understand the concept now. Yes, it is very applicable to the real world. And remember we could call the "A+++ fish" "A+++ semi-lizards", too if we wanted to. And with many changes we might end up with an "A++++++++ complete lizard" (for those who don`t understand the terminology, look several posts up.) The proof we have for intermediate stages are in the fossil record given that many branches lead to dead ends as slurba pointed out. If you looked closely enough at the fossil record, there are examples, but not many as these intermediate species did not survive for long.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
No ninja, I would not like to add you because I`ve heard all the "hyptheses" before and i would prefer to read the respected journals "Nature", "Science" and "Geology" which I have subsribed to for many years. If any of your "hypotheses" appear in these international journals I will gladly read them.

Won`t hold my breath.

0
Reply
Male 91
slurba: But where is the evidence to say that they evolved into the lung fish? That would imply that at SOME point all of those fish at any given point would have to have experienced a time where they would have had to have a reason to change. And any reason to change would be to survive, and what fish do is survive. So why change if the transition could be lethal?
0
Reply
Male 132
Like I said before, think of a tree. Fish didn`t directly evolve into amphibians, they split, making two large branches with many twigs, some of which died off, some of which stayed, creating odd creatures like the lungifish. Also, reread what NeurolRu posted. Before something dies, if it has offspring, the genes still continue. Also note that we are talking about entire populations, not individuals, and millions of years of reproduction.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
0
Reply
Male 91
And I`m trying to get it off IAB.
My email/msn is [email protected]
So davymid if you would like you can add me and I would gladly explain another "hypothesis."
0
Reply
Male 91
Yes, I understand it.
Its almost making sense too, but can you apply it to real world? and remember, they are still fish here. They still aren`t lizards. And you still don`t have any proof at all of these intermediate stages.
0
Reply
Male 132
This is probably why there are so few people that actually believe in evolution. If it takes this long to exlain it to one person, how often do you think kids learning it in school actually comprehend when they say we`re cousins of apes and not direct descendants. Although I can honestly use this arguement against myself because that`s what I believed when I was being taught evolution in 7th grade half a year ago...
0
Reply
Male 2,605
Whoa whoa. If this conversation ever skips off IAB, be sure and let me know, eh?
0
Reply
Female 74
And thanks for the compliments DBtG. As I said, I`m getting a PhD in biochemistry, so I`ve researched this thoroughly.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
NinjaChibi,

As a professional geologist/palaeontologist, the fact that we do see ANY records at all in the fossil record is a matter of miracle. With plate tectonic cyclesand abrasive sedimetary processes being what they are, soft matter preservation is a miracle in itself. So if there was a murder scene, and we only had snapshots of the crime, the getaway, do we need every bit of CCTV footage along the way to convict the criminal?

No. Postulation of evolution, by small incremental improvements, elegantly delivers the great diversity of life on earth.

Please spell it out for me ninja, if not natural selection, what is your alternative hypothesis?

0
Reply
Female 74
It should be reiterated that populations evolve, not individuals. Lets say some fish have an advantageous mutation (A fish), and some do not (D fish). The A fish pass down the mutation, which may have further changes done on it, creating what I`ll call "A+ fish", but also have some A fish that stayed the same. The D fish, who do not have any advantage, died and did not pass anything down. Now the A+ fish have an advantage over A fish, and the A fish die. The A+ fish may have A+ fish and A++ fish, and the A+ fish may die, and so on. If the environment stabilizes, the fish with the greatest advantage, survive, and the previous fish have died off. Does this make sense to you?
0
Reply
Male 132
Evolution isn`t complicated to explain... you basically already understand it, but questioning simple aspects of it.
0
Reply
Male 91
But the species that you claimed to have been the transitional stages were not strong enough to survive.

Do either of you have msn? slurba or neurolRu because this is far too complicated to explain over forum.
([email protected])

0
Reply
Male 132
NeurolRu, you are my f*cking hero. You seem to be one of the only people who actually understand what evolution is.
---
*coughs*
0
Reply
Male 132
Not all of them died off, but most of them did. The ones that stayed had offspring, those offspring are more like the result we see today. The ones that died off are species like tiktaalik.
0
Reply
Male 330
NeurolRu, you are my f*cking hero. You seem to be one of the only people who actually understand what evolution is.
0
Reply
Male 91
So if they were not fit enough to survive how did they pass on the gene? If they were well.... dead.
0
Reply
Male 132
^Basically what NeurolRu said, only less inteligently stated.
0
Reply
Male 132
NeurolRu; your link was actually 404`d for me.
But what you imply is that there must be THOUSANDS of species of fish that are almost lizards. but we can only find a few. Yes there are similarities between them but there isn`t any species that isn`t part fish or part lizard, they are either a lizard or a fish. And if you say "well they just died, thats why we don`t see them" If they ALL died where did the lizards come from?
--
I just have you half and halfs.... what else do you need? And the whole "they died off, how can lizards exsist?" comment is countered by the tree illustration: Most of the little branches died off, but some (the ones that had the best traits) stayed and eventually had offspring that evolved into "lizards" (amphibians).
0
Reply
Male 91
Sorry, if some of it doesn`t make sense grammatically, I am in Europe. It is 3am.
0
Reply
Female 74
Overmann makes a good point. Smaller organisms, such as fission yeast, double their population once every 2.5 hours (I know this because I do research with them). This rapid turning over of genetic material gives more opportunity for mutations to occur, thus any advantages happen much faster. Higher order species are much slower, and therefore the transitions are much more gradual and harder to observe.
NINJACHIBI: I think I`ve made this point several times now. The inbetween species became the current species because they were unable to survive the environmental changes as they were. "Semi-lungfish" BECAME lungfish because they simply were not FIT enough to continue.
0
Reply
Male 91
NeurolRu; your link was actually 404`d for me.
But what you imply is that there must be THOUSANDS of species of fish that are almost lizards. but we can only find a few. Yes there are similarities between them but there isn`t any species that isn`t part fish or part lizard, they are either a lizard or a fish. And if you say "well they just died, thats why we don`t see them" If they ALL died where did the lizards come from?
0
Reply
Male 132
slurba; That species is alive now right. So technically shouldn`t some of the other transitions to that fish still be alive? We haven`t found them? why? There is a taxinomic history listed, but they are all lungfish.. not part lungfish part lizard.
--
Those are now dead now from competition, probably. They may have had bad mutations and died off. Also, you keep saying lizard, but I think you mean amphibian. The half lungfish half "lizard" (amphibian) is the tetrapods I listed earlier.
0
Reply
Male 91
slurba; That species is alive now right. So technically shouldn`t some of the other transitions to that fish still be alive? We haven`t found them? why? There is a taxinomic history listed, but they are all lungfish.. not part lungfish part lizard.
0
Reply
Male 2,605
Holy God. (Relax: I mean that metaphorically.)

I haven`t yet finished thoroughly reading the posts thus far although I`ve been monitoring this thread for some time, secretly hoping it would bear fruit in the form of an evolution debate.

I`ll return once I`ve done my research but for now, NeurolRu, you`re doing a great job. You may find it useful to inform them about generation time and why bacteria evolve much, much more quickly into new strains than larger organisms evolve into new species.

0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: let me make this more visual for you. Imagine a fish in an environment where food is diminishing in water but is increasing on land. This fish has offspring that have gills that are able to take oxygen from the air, but just a little bit. So they can spend more time out of water to get food. These fish may have offspring that have gills that become even more lung-like etc. Gradually, these fish that can access the food on land are more likely to survive and pass the rudimentary lungs to the subsequent generations. Again its a very gradual process, and as slurba pointed out, its very much more treelike, but this is just an example.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Ninjachibi,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6913934.stm. Please. Please please please read this and then expand your mind to apply it to some other things.

0
Reply
Female 74
slurba is correct. It`s more of a tree than a straight line. I was just giving an easy example to summarize an incredibly complex process. Mutations occur in the genome constantly, some make no impact, some lead to disadvantages, some lead to advantages. Also, mutation has no INTENTION. The ones that can be passed down occur spontaneously through meiosis or mitosis (depending on the organism), and whichever ones happen to allow for an advantage are given to offspring who in turn give it to their offspring, etc...
0
Reply
Male 132
So, where are the fish with the semi-lung-gills? There is no evidence for them, therefore that cannot count as a valid "proof."
And then what happens to a fish that is stuck out of water in a drought? It dies. So how did it pass on the genes to the next fish?
----
No evidence, you say? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungfish
0
Reply
Male 91
So, where are the fish with the semi-lung-gills? There is no evidence for them, therefore that cannot count as a valid "proof."
And then what happens to a fish that is stuck out of water in a drought? It dies. So how did it pass on the genes to the next fish?
0
Reply
Male 132
Somewhat, however, let me explain in more in depth. Don`t view evolution as a straight line; view it as a tree that branches out and sometimes stops (extinction of that species, or branch) amphibians started off as simply a twig, until the environment selected them and allowd the fish with the bumps, lefts, flippers, or whatever, to live and eventually have more babies. The process repeats itself. There were probably MANY different variations, however these were BAD mutations as thus they died off, leaving few fossils.
0
Reply
Female 74
Ninjachibi: you`ve almost got it. But remember, changes occur in internal organs as well as external. So there were subtle changes in the way the gills worked, allowing them to bind oxygen differently. Like I said before, this could have been advantageous in times of drought.
0
Reply
Male 91
Yeah, basically I don`t understand how the fish survived the transition.
0
Reply
Male 91
okay so just for example: (--> 1000ish years)
Fish-->fish with a little bump-->fish with almost a leg-->fish with legs-->fish with lungs and legs?-->almost lizard with remains of fins and somehow survived the transition from having lungs underwater for thousands of years--> to finally a lizard.

This is the best way I could describe it.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
Oh. My. God.

To all the Christian apologists out there- I`m a Muslim. Or I`m a Hindu. Or I`m some guy who lives in the African jungle, never met a missionary. Or I`m a child who died after 2 days. Am I going to hell?

The biggest coup that the Christian Taleban (I`m talking to you, Middle America) ever pulled off was to convince the world that there`s a "Debate" going on in the world of science as to whether evolution is real or not. THERE IS NO SUCH DEBATE AMONG THE GLOBAL, RESPECTED SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent... and please read the whole article... I`ve read The Bible (I`m a recovering Christian) and I`ve read science books. I prefer evidence over a 2500 year old book of fables written by 100+ authors who thought the sun went round the earth.

Stop believing the propaganda, and please watch htt

Female 74
NinjaChibi: the species that were in between current ones are not in existence any longer. They BECAME the current species because with their set of genetic code, they could not survive the environmental changes. Thus mutations occurred and they are now the species we see today. And these changes are still occurring, but it is too slow to witness.
0
Reply
Female 590
Liquidglass:
He cites three very reliable sources. I suggest you read more.
0
Reply
Male 132
I did show you those... there were like 15 listed. These are the only ones FOUND. There were probably 1000`s of species in between, but the fossils havn`t been found (yet?). We constantly find more and more fossils that explain things, though.
0
Reply
Female 74
We can squabble over whether or not the historic content of scriptures are true, but the aspects that involve abstract thinking (God, miracles, etc) cannot be tested and defy logic. Let`s get back to evolution... does anyone have any questions? I`m getting my PhD in biochemistry, so I love talking about this stuff.
0
Reply
Male 132
Not neccesarily errors as much as simple fairy tale. How about the cure of leprosy? I`m just going to copy and paste this off a website I visit:

God`s law for lepers: Get two birds. Kill one. Dip the live bird in the blood of the dead one. Sprinkle the blood on the leper seven times, and then let the blood-soaked bird fly away. Next find a lamb and kill it. Wipe some of its blood on the patient`s right ear, thumb, and big toe. Sprinkle seven times with oil and wipe some of the oil on his right ear, thumb and big toe. Repeat. Finally find another pair of birds. Kill one and dip the live bird in the dead bird`s blood. Wipe some blood on the patient`s right ear, thumb, and big toe. Sprinkle the house with blood 7 times. That`s all there is to it.

0
Reply
Male 91
And i was meaning even more than that.
You are still just naming species and saying that this particular species became this species over thousands of years... well where are the ones in between those? and then in between those... and so on.
0
Reply
Female 74
NinjaChibi: first of all, the nature of science is that it changes as new evidence arises but it is rare that we completely abandon an idea, we just make subtle changes to it. You can`t prove any religion wrong because it is based off of faith. There is no hypothesis involved and no rigorous scientific testing. This of course means you cannot prove it to be true either. Whereas with scientific theories, we can experiment over and over to provide evidence for our hypotheses, and can have a high level of certainty (as in Newton`s laws for example). Religion there is no such certainty, and this is the nature of religion.
0
Reply
Male 91
Show me the errors.
0
Reply
Male 132
Also, the Bible`s supposed facts have been proven wrong... many times.
0
Reply
Male 132
Evolution isnt a theory, the Theory of Evoltion BY natural selection, however, is a theory.
0
Reply
Male 91
Sorry century.
0
Reply
Male 91
slurba, you missed his point. His point is that the bible is 2000 years old and hasn`t been proven wrong. As apposed the theory of evolution, which is constantly changing and was made up only in this decade. And note: is still only a THEORY.
0
Reply
Male 132
No, no I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
I am asking where are the intermediate stages between those. because what you are saying is that there are LOTS of intermediate stages, so basically, where are the ones of the fish becoming lizards? there must be sometime where a fish has to have some kind of lungs to become a lizard otherwise how would it breathe air? And why would fish WANT to breathe air, I don`t think a fish would last long if it were growing lungs underwater. They would have no use for them. And would probably die.
----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrapodomo...
0
Reply
Female 74
If you want to see a transition between fish and lizards look at amphibians. They have developed in ways that allow them to spend parts of their lives in aqueous environments and parts on land. Also, there is a very famous example of a fish with legs called the mudskipper. It has small limbs that allow it to move for periods of time on land. This may have been advantageous in times of drought. There are plenty of examples of these "inbetween" species if you just look.
0
Reply
Male 132
Get off the Internet, right now. I can`t even begin to tell you how close minded and hypocritical this is, but I`ll give you hints:
The "old fart told some other old fart this and that" is basically a summary of the bible. Let`s say a flood happens in a small town, and everything is destroyed excpet this man with a boat who tells his friend of the story. His friend tells his wife, who exagerates the facts, and makes the flood cover the entire nation, country, or region. Ever play the game of telephone (you tell something to someone, they tell someone else, and the words go in a circle where everyone whispers to eachother, eventually the meaning is lost, and the last person to get the information says out loud what THEY heard, not what was originally stated). This is how so many bible passages look incredible.

*wipes sweat off forehead*

0
Reply
Male 91
No, no I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
I am asking where are the intermediate stages between those. because what you are saying is that there are LOTS of intermediate stages, so basically, where are the ones of the fish becoming lizards? there must be sometime where a fish has to have some kind of lungs to become a lizard otherwise how would it breathe air? And why would fish WANT to breathe air, I don`t think a fish would last long if it were growing lungs underwater. They would have no use for them. And would probably die.
0
Reply
Male 159
I have just one final, and simple, question. Why do the athiest/naturalist/whatever that want to be called, always... ALWAYS, resort to name calling and using obscene language. As if these things will help their "story". I`m starting to have a big problem with this whole "science" thing. Some guy told some guy who told you. They teach you out of a book that may be as old as what... 20 years old. Folks, your science has dated books from the bible written over 2000 years ago. Where, in writing, do you have information that dates back that far? I`ll believe text written by the people who were THERE WHEN IT HAPPENED, rather than some old fart who learned it from some other old fart who claims they have figured out the answers.

I`m bored with this now... buh bye

0
Reply
Female 74
As for the law of conservation of mass: We are all made of the same atoms that once comprised the "cosmic soup" of the big bang. Evolution isn`t suggesting that new matter is created. It is making use of matter that is already there. Remember, our bodies are made of what sustenance we intake and this does not violate the law of conservation of mass.
0
Reply
Female 74
You`re thinking about this all wrong. It`s not like there is one mutation and "poof", it`s a different species. Changes are very gradual. If you want an intermediate species, take a look at the fossil record, homo habilus, homo erectus, australopithecus, etc. And the reason you don`t see them walking around anymore is because with their genome, they weren`t able to survive the environmental changes, so mutations occurred gradually until they became modern humans. Now we have stabilized (at least in "modernized" civilizations) and we are no longer subject to natural selection (unfortunately).
0
Reply
Male 91
And even still, manwithplanx, that isn`t an interspecies "mutation."
0
Reply
Male 91
Have you proof of that?
Also the law of conservation of mass: Matter cannot be created nor destroyed.
How does evolution work around that? When it implies that we came from nothing.
0
Reply
Male 58
Human beings have actually quite recently (on a worldly scale not a lifetime one) have mutated. a couple hundred years ago humans were smaller and the average height of a person was much lower than it is now.
0
Reply
Male 91
Granted. But also then, if it were billions of years, wouldn`t we see more evidence of the change in species? I have only seen one or two, and with closer examination have turned out to be hoaxes. There doesn`t seem to be any record of an "in between" stage. If you find any could you send me the link? I would appreciate it. Because I haven`t found any.
0
Reply
Female 74
Do you people even know what a mutation actually is?
0
Reply
Female 74
You obviously didn`t understand me. Before the original bacteria die, they reproduce by fission, and the "offspring" may carry a mutation that allows them to LIVE in conditions with antibiotics. This is why doctors are so WARY of prescribing antibiotics because they are afraid of breeding the "superbugs". Ever heard of the highly resistant strain of tuberculosis that some guy was spreading around... mutations that allow the bacteria to resist medications that would normally kill it are the reason for this. Yes, they are still bacteria, but like I said many many small changes over billions of years, and this bacteria may evolve into a eukaryotic cell, and the eukaryotic cell may become multicellular, then the multicellular organism may evolve to reproduce sexually... etc, etc... and collectively the small changes lead to novel species.
0
Reply
Male 91
But the fact is... it`s still bacteria. Not a new species. And the bacteria didn`t gain anything, it lost the gene that caused it to react to the antibiotic.
0
Reply
Female 74
I think everyone has a misconception about what a mutation is. Mutations get a bad rep because of science fictions movies. Mutations can actually be very beneficial to a species. Just look at bacteria. When bacteria are exposed to antibiotics, some reproduce and the offspring carry a mutation that allows them to be resistant to it, thus they can grow in conditions that most bacteria would perish in. This is the basic premise of natural selection and you can WATCH it happen.
0
Reply
Male 91
NeurolRu show me the evidence for the change. There should be thousands that have accumulated over "billions of years." Show me one.
0
Reply
Female 74
...We are 98% similar genetically to chimpanzees… and many genes (especially ones meant to repair DNA damage) have been highly conserved over time and homologues are even found in prokaryotes when compared to humans. And what on earth possessed you to think that the evidence for evolution has been faked? Why would people spend so much time and effort FAKING evolution? That’s ridiculous. People aren’t afraid of god, if anything people take much comfort in god and would rather shun evolution than shun god because evolution offers no afterlife and nobody watching over them. And don’t get me started on the religion thing. Put down your bible and read a science book.
0
Reply
Female 74
Woot45: I just couldn’t let the idiocy you just spewed go. You obviously have no conception about the actual theory of evolution. Induced mutation on animals can be deleterious, yes, but it all depends on what type of mutation on what gene. They can also be very beneficial. The thing you said about a person getting used to the North Pole is not evolution because evolution occurs in populations not individuals. Why can’t people understand that micro-evolution leads to macro-evolution? Keep in mind this process has been happening for BILLIONS of years. That is a long long time for these small changes to build up, thus different species emerge….
0
Reply
Male 91
I think its funny all of you are so ready to discredit woot45`s argument, but tell me, can you disprove it?
Mutations are never good, there is visible proof of that. So why if you stretch that over billions of years would they become a good mutations? and if so then shouldn`t we see hundreds, thousands of "in between" stages?

Prove to me, The_Maddog, that without a doubt evolution is true. I would really like to see your "valid argument".

0
Reply
Male 3,369
Yup.

happens every time IAB posts something that offends the religious nuts!

0
Reply
Female 416
Wasnt there a post like this a couple months ago?
0
Reply
Male 3,369
heh..I dont care anymore....the educated know what angle I`m coming from...the ignorant will belive whatever they want till life slaps them in the face and they are left questioning! I`ll never be in that position!
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Religion only exists in the mind of the uneducated and in-experianced BubbaLuvSpon! Come back when you and your friends have a valid argument...oh wait...you never will! you say crap like "The bible says that if you believe in Jesus Christ, you will be saved and spend eternity in his presence"

What hell does every other religion say you idiot? Belive in this that or the other....You know what..i`ve seen to may people die or suffer due to random acts (nature or manmade) to buy what your selling...FFS dude...just go out and see the world for what it really is!

0
Reply
Male 330
What miracles do you see every day?
0
Reply
Male 159
Oh, and kittyfox... I DON`T fear death. That doesn`t mean I`m ready to die though.

manwithwhatever... My belief would not be crushed. The bible says that if you believe in Jesus Christ, you will be saved and spend eternity in his presence. In your theory, you will be there, and I don`t have a problem with that. I`m not missing out on ANYTHING in life living the way I do. WIN WIN for me!!

0
Reply
Male 159
Bad things happen because of sin. That was God`s punishment on the world. They ate the fruit, and from then on, the world was cursed.

The evolution that we are saying is not true is the evolution of man from single celled organisms. If you can believe that we are where we are from that, talk about blind faith. I see God`s work every day. I see the wonderful miracles everyday. The miracles are recorded in the bible. Yeah yeah, the bible is fiction, but where is the book that discredits the bible, and how old is it??

0
Reply
Male 12
Woot45: Please go back inside your church, lock the doors, and never come out again. People like you scare me.
0
Reply
Male 280
I`d like to address all the people who feel that religion, as DBtG said, "corrupts with arrogance."

Religion is, by and large, a good thing. Religion is an effective system designed to keep the peace and maintain a level of morality in a society. There are instances where religion causes war or strife but in that way it functions little different from a government. Furthermore, making blanket statements against all of Christianity is simply ignorant. We are talking about more than 1/6 of the world population.

0
Reply
Male 280
Man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_...

Woot45: You`ve unwittingly stated that you do, infact, believe in evolution. Evolution at its most basic level is define as nothing more than, "change over time". The difference between a pug and a beagle is evolution and macro evolution at that. For future arguments I suggest you stay away from that entire line of comments, no need to open that debate.
Your comments about mating deers and bears shows an ignorance of the subject matter. In fact, what an animal can mate with is one of the ways we decide what species it is.
Your accusations that scientific evidence has been faked is baseless and without merit. Who has shown that there has been faked evidence? What evidence has been faked? And if only half of the evidence is fake then does that not mean that we still a massive amount of information pointing to the validity of Natrual Selection?
La

0
Reply
Male 330
"Become a Christian. Be fufilled."

You must be fulfilled if you`re on I-am-bored calling people who trust scientific evidence "stupid".
Christianity doesn`t fulfill, it corrupts with arrogance.

0
Reply
Male 178
kittyfox I agree with you
0
Reply
Male 14
my single favorite post EVER, so many of these i hv been wondering about
0
Reply
Female 23
Here`s what i think. People have a natural fear of death. And don`t try to act badass and say you don`t. You`re not fooling anyone. I think that, while I can`t speak for other religions, Christianity was `invented` to eliminate that fear of death, and make everyone feel better. I like to think of death as an equlizer, that everone, if they go anywhere, it would be like limbo or something. In death no one is better than anyone else. Which is why i dislike religion so much. I think that it was a way to have some sort of control over people so that there would be less trouble. By saying that basically, if you believe in this, and do this, this, and this, and dont do this, you will have nothing to fear when you die. People are going to take up that offer. As for evolution, really I could care less. Really I always thought that `God` was very child-like. He created people so he could be worshiped, got pissed when people didnt listen to him. Very childlike. Go ahead. Bring on the instults.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Oh and Woot45...Your full of typical Chrisitan American BS! It makes no diffrence what religion you are! Saying
"Anyone who believes in evolution is just, plain and simple, afraid. They want to do whatever they want in their life and not be punished for it."

Lol at you...most people DONT do what the want because they are afraid of repercusions..I dont rob a bank because I`m afraid of going to prison, not God..Get a grip ffs!
You only ever see this stupid crap off american christians!

0
Reply
Male 3,369
BubbaLuvSpon

Lets recap. Your Christian, with a "blessed" life! Lucky you. In my time on this planet I`ve seen nothing that proves "God". I`m no expert, nor will I ever be. I`ve read the holy books of 5 religions and found nothing but thought control..not for modern day man but previous uneducated ages if you will. I`ve taken intrest in what science has to offer and that seems to be bang on! We are animals..clever animals but animals none the less..I`ve seen man commit attrocites against man, I`ve seen horrific things happen to children. I`ve seen the underbelly of what "humanity" brings! God was not there for thoses innocents! "If" he exists, he certainly dosnt care! I`ll stick with scinces guess work rather than some big hairy bloke in the sky casting magic tricks!

0
Reply
Female 1,398
they`re still the same thing: a dog. No matter what we do to them, no matter if we make them hairless, or shaggy, or poofy, or give them squashed faces, they`re still a dog. Species don`t change into other species, people.
Plus, it`s been a proven fact that more than half of evolution `evidence` has been faked. Faked drawings in biology books, fake bones, fake discoveries, fake this, fake that. And you know why? It`s because so many people are just so afraid of God. They`re afraid that they have to be morale, they`re afraid that they have to do good instead of sin. But the thing is, once you accept Jesus, you`re no longer afraid. You don`t live in fear; your life is fufilled. You feel whole, and just... wonderful. So accept Jesus; learn how to be a Christian. If you believe in evolution and other false gods, then your life is wasted, and you go to hell. I`d take Jesus, and not just because I don`t want to go to hell, but because Jesus fufills me.
Become a Christian. Be fufilled.
0
Reply
Female 1,398
Anyone who believes in evolution is just, plain and simple, afraid. They want to do whatever they want in their life and not be punished for it. Face it people; evolution is FALSE. All mutations on people and animals are bad. Scientists have tried to make mutations that are good, and they`ve come out with three legged monkeys.
I agree with small scale evolution; something adapts to its surroundings by being resistant to the cold, things like that. That happens to humans all the time; if you suddenly decide to spend your whole life in the North Pole, you`re not going to mind the cold as much as you used to.
Now large scale evolution, as in things changing species, is just stupid. Ever try making a bear mate with a deer, so you have a bear-deer?? No matter what you do to an animal, it`s always the same SPECIES. The species does not change. Whenever anything mutates, it`s always bad. That`s why it`s called a mutation.
Look at dogs: no matter how many times we cross-breed them
0
Reply
Male 58
*forgives
0
Reply
Male 58
"Taking the 2 side into account, when I die, I`ll either just go away, OR, I`ll be in heaven with my Creator. WHY would anyone want to take that gamble."

I personally take that risk for 1 main reason, if I am wrong there is a loophole, in the bible it says god forgive all. IF I am wrong then I go to a paradise like place and good times are had by all. If you are wrong everything you have believed in is crushed, but you wouldn`t be able to think that because your consciousness is destroyed. I like my gamble best.

0
Reply
Female 1,832
Ya learn something new everyday
0
Reply
Male 447
third eyelids wow
i have 2 eyelids
0
Reply
Male 159
"However, religion has never been able to prove themselves right or wrong without using the term "faith" which is the only thing scientists can`t use practically."


Dead Sea Scrolls?

0
Reply
Male 159
oops...
cont... and I owe that to God. I post this only because I want everyone to have the blessed life that I have. I look forward to church, and seeing the friends I have there. They help me get through those struggles I face every day, that brings guilt upon me. Not guilt because of my religion, because I`ve had guilt my whole life. Just now, I have a remedy for that guilt.

Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. Matthew 18:18-20

0
Reply
Male 330
BubbaLuvSpon, you need to shut the f*ck up. It doesn`t matter if I agree or disagree with you. All you`re doing is trying to pick fights. Get a f*cking life.

Douche.

0
Reply
Male 2,796
Yes, science is proving itself wrong all the time. By doing so, they (scientists and the like) prove themselves right in other things. This will continue to be true until we all are extinct.

However, religion has never been able to prove themselves right or wrong without using the term "faith" which is the only thing scientists can`t use practically.

My money is on logical and deductive reasoning. You know, "the world is flat"... "Wait, I just sailed from one land mass and ended up completely at the other side and didn`t see a drop-off point." .... "Hmmm, deduction and logic tells me that science was wrong! The world is not flat, it must be round, lets test that theory!"

This was going on while the deeply religious were saying, "There is a God and you must worship him!" ... "Really? I don`t see him, where is this God of whom you speak?" ... "You must have faith!"... "You`re full of Poo!" .... "

0
Reply
Male 159
Christianity is the belief that God sent His Son Jesus to Earth to defeat sin.
Sin, is as we all know, is bad.
I read my bible (sometimes), I go to church every Sunday. While these things are great, they are not needed to be saved. Faith is Jesus, and baptism, are. I put my faith in the fact that I will be forgiven for the things I`ve done, and surely WILL do.
Does putting my faith in that make me "weak minded"? I don`t see how, BUT I can assure you of one thing. Taking the 2 side into account, when I die, I`ll either just go away, OR, I`ll be in heaven with my Creator. WHY would anyone want to take that gamble. If I`m wrong, I`ve not missed out on ANYTHING. I`ve lived a good life. If I`m RIGHT, wow! Life eternity in heaven rather than hell. Peeps, I don`t think I`m better than anyone who posts here. In fact, taking all into consideration, I`m probably towards the bottom of the barrel. I know since I`ve been saved, many great things have come into my life, and I
0
Reply
Male 159
Heh heh... "The Maddog"... sir, what "nonsense" have I been spouting? Hang on, let me read back for a minute....

OK, I`m back. The only thing I can see that you are refering to is when I commented about the Earth being 6000 years old and creation taking 6 days, because everything else was questions. Now, I know the claims of rocks being found that "dated" back to millions of years. If you follow science, you will see a pattern. Science is ALWAYS changing, and proving itself wrong. Check it out!

Babidee... without being rude (which is something you need to work ok), pick a side, ok? If you read your bible, and you believe what it says, then how can you believe in evolution?

0
Reply
Male 84
This article is BEGGING for religious/evolution debate.
0
Reply
Female 192
^^^one of the stupidest comments I`ve seen in awhile...common sense, lol...its called "morals" douche!!! neway all ya`ll ranting about religion just shut up, I firmly believe in evolution and christiany.
0
Reply
Male 3,369
Ohhh... I`m so weak minded because I have religion. What shall I do with the rest of my life?? Since there is no God, then maybe I can get away with murder and rape. Ohh, but those are against the law, aren`t they?? Hmmm, wonder where that law came from... anybody... anybody??

--------------------------------------------------

Oh...lemme think now..How many people have died in the name of religion? How many deaths in "Gods" name? Lemme guess..your religion is right, all others are wrong. Wake up, look around you and learn something will ya. I cant disprove God to you, nor do I wish too..But really..educate yourself in those things you think science is wrong in ok before you start spouting nonsense!

0
Reply
Male 40
"where did we get the idea that those things are wrong?"

How about common sense

0
Reply
Male 2,781
I`M CURIOUS, DO ANIMALS KNOW THEY`RE DOING SOMETHING `WRONG` WHEN THEY KILL OTHER ANIMALS FOR FOOD? OR WHEN WE HUMANS EAT A HAMBURGER? NO WE DIDN`T SLAUGHTER THE COW, BUT WE DO PARTAKE FROM IT.

ARE ANIMALS SELF-AWARE? DO THEY HAVE THOUGHTS? DREAMS, ASPIRATIONS?

ANYWAY. PEACE

0
Reply
Female 2,552
Ughhhh, I learned this in Science class.
0
Reply
Male 159
Yeah yeah... I got the "us" part... "humans" I believe he said. We already cleared that up, but thanks for playing. My next question was, where did we get the idea that those things are wrong?

btw, why the name calling? That wasn`t very nice!

0
Reply
Male 73
"...Ohh, but those are against the law, aren`t they?? Hmmm, wonder where that law came from... anybody... anybody??"

Us? Douche.

0
Reply
Male 68
I`d love a third eyelid again. Unfortunately, that would put some goggles makers out of business.
0
Reply
Male 159
Humans? Hmmm... interesting theory. I wonder how this "human" who evolved from monk... err, I mean apes, was able to decide that these certain things should be wrong. Help me Mighty Splurbyburbl, help me!!
0
Reply
Male 2,796
"Ohhh... I`m so weak minded because I have religion. What shall I do with the rest of my life?? Since there is no God, then maybe I can get away with murder and rape. Ohh, but those are against the law, aren`t they?? Hmmm, wonder where that law came from... anybody... anybody??"

I am glad you see it my way. Would any other mindless religious idiots like to confess? Oh, to answer your question, since it was not a God that made those laws, then it was humans. See how easy that was?

0
Reply
Male 49
i dont believe in evolution
0
Reply
Female 103
"Does anybody really know what the theory of evolution is?
Humans didn`t come from monkeys. Humans didn`t come from apes. Humans and apes both came from a common ancestor."

Thank you very, very much for that.
Hoorah for high school Biology!

0
Reply
Male 159
Ohhh... I`m so weak minded because I have religion. What shall I do with the rest of my life?? Since there is no God, then maybe I can get away with murder and rape. Ohh, but those are against the law, aren`t they?? Hmmm, wonder where that law came from... anybody... anybody??
0
Reply
Male 2,796
The idea of God or any deity what-so-ever should be considered clinically insane. The human body is waaaay too flawed for there to be "intelligent design" unless that intelligence was not so bright. The Christian idea of God is elementary at best. I mean, a God creates two humans so they can worship him and feel the love of God... but God knows (because he is all knowing) that the two humans will sin, thus destroying paradise and creating a world of hardships forever. There is zero...absolutely zero objectivism in religion. It is all mindless emotion starved people that need to know that a God has a "plan" for them because they are two weak minded to have a plan for themselves.

Thanks for listening to my rant on religion and have a nice day.

0
Reply
Male 159
OH OH... I have a question!! If we all came from monkeys, or whatever... was it a *poof* "you`re human now"? Cause I want one of those "nearly human" thingies as a pet! That would be kewl! Besides, everyone knows that the earth is only about 6000 years old, and it all was created in 6 days. Sheesh... sillies!
0
Reply
Male 880
"^^^ you`re kidding, right?"

I think he was making a joke.

I would miss my toes...

0
Reply
Male 3,369
Does anybody really know what the theory of evolution is?
Humans didn`t come from monkeys. Humans didn`t come from apes. Humans and apes both came from a common ancestor.

-----------------------------------------------
The first intelligent post I`ve seen in a long time. You win the internetz!

0
Reply
Female 263
toes? wtf.
0
Reply
Male 330
^^^ you`re kidding, right?
0
Reply
Male 96
shouldn`t this be titled "things that god put on humans in order to fool scientists into thinking evolution exists when in reality it is all part of his elaborate plan"?

come on

0
Reply
Male 330
Does anybody really know what the theory of evolution is?

Humans didn`t come from monkeys. Humans didn`t come from apes. Humans and apes both came from a common ancestor.

0
Reply
Female 305
isnt this a repost???
0
Reply
Male 724
Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache/1.3.37 Server at decimation.com Port 80


;-;

0
Reply
Male 16
^^LOL..Male nipple. Yea, that would be weird if men started lactating.
0
Reply
Male 111
Correct. We were never monkeys. Humans and monkeys share a common ancestor. In fact, humans share a common ancestor with every form of life on the planet.

"You are a cousin not just of apes, but of the sequoia and the amoeba, of mosses and butterflies and blue whales" -- Dale McGowan

0
Reply
Male 132