Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
About the pic: I`m actually not sure if it`s shopped. It`s commonly called "Serious Cat" because of the look on its face. If you go on Google Images you can find pics with captions like "I are Serious Cat." There`s also a demotivator that says "Serious Cat: He`s drating serious."
Agree with your points, well made. Happiest days of my life were back when I believed in Santa.
But off topic, is that cat in your pic photoshopped? Because if not it`s the ugliest c*nting animal I was ever unfortunate enough to have laid eyes on.
Please: Google next time.
And if there is no free will, god plays a cruel joke with eternal damnation, does he not? If he knows before you`re even conceived that you will sin and go to hell, what free will do you have?
Not to mention the irony of the idea that we were created in gods image. If I build a desk, and it breaks.. Do I blame the desk? No, I blame myself, the creator. How could a god judge a design in which he himself made. If we give in to our weaknesses of sin, and go to hell, it can only be attributed to the designer for not making us strong enough to go against it.
I mean, do people even logically think in what they believe?
He`s right, though. History has shown that the `you believe what you want and I`ll believe what I want` idea just doesn`t work. It`s one of the foundations of most modern religions, `push your view on others`. I`m not saying that there are not open minded christians that mind their own business, but religion still tends to be a driving force behind political agendas.
The only arguable (and slight at that) topic is if we evolved from a lower lifeform. Again, I find it somewhat naive to know that evolution works, see proof along the line that we have evolved from another species, and yet try to argue that it`s just coincidence, and that some `creator` made us instead.
It is a logical fallacy to interpret a gap in a theory as a supporting argument for a completely unrelated theory such as creationism.
First off, neo-darwanist weren`t the first to add the `mutation`, darwin added that himself in origin of the species.
Secondly, mutations are not always destructive. Mutations in a HIGHLY EVOLVED creature are usually destructive due to the fact that the creature is already highly evolved. There are not many creatures in this world that are not highly evolved, so we don`t see a positive mutation very often.
However, evolution begins very rapidly, because at such a low evolutionary stage, almost every mutation is a positive one.
Also, I would argue that even if one in a million mutations were positive, evolution would still work perfectly. The 999,999 would not survive as well as the status quo, and the 1 would survive better, meaning evolution still works.
Everybody shut the fück up and go worship your gods (or lack thereof) in your own spare time. And for fück`s sake, don`t drag everybody else into it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, anglefan.
Have you "every" taken 9th grade Biology?
sorry for triple post.
This guy thinks he`s smart because he quotes smart people and says big words.
I`m pretty sure he fails at understanding basic logic though.
Evolution and Natural Selection can create new organs and genetic information.... has this person every taken 9th grade Biology?
"Mouth-Breathing God-Bummers". Don`t ask to explain why I think it`s just great, if I analyse it too much the magic of it may sublimate.
Shakespeare wouldn`t be in it. I love it.
I don`t mind people disagreeing with evolution so much as people being drating FUNDIES!!!
Ever been on antibiotics? I have, I was on a two-week course of them for an infection. After 3 days the infection had cleared up, with no symptoms, yet I still had to take them for 2 weeks afterwards.
Natural selection. With antibiotics, it`s assumed that some of the bacteria may have some resistance to the stuff. If this were the case with me, and had I stopped after 3 days, it`s possible some resistant bacteria would have repopulated and then I`d be in trouble, as all the bacteria would now be resistant.
Natural selection is the very essence of evolution; it`s the primary driving force. Pushing individuals in a population to be the strongest they can, to fight for their lives to ensure there is a next generation, all of whom will be just as strong. More to follow...
Eventually, the hole will dissapear.
Furthurmore, not the vestigial fins on the modern whale.
From Ernst Haeckel, Anthropogenie AKA The Evolution of Man, 1874. The diagram shows embryonic to foetal development in 8 different species, from top to bottom in each case.
Anyway, whatever, all the creationists have gone away and hid (as usual) when they`re confronted with science, facts, and someone who (just maybe) knows what they`re talking about.
Somehow driven to the sea
Damn, there was a pic in my biology book, it showed the sililarities between different animals as embyioes. Embrionic somthing...
Just another quickie, Horse Evolution this time (From McFadden, Bruce (2005) “Fossil Horses - Evidence of Evolution.” Science, 307(5716):1728-1730.
No transitional forms my bollocks.
We are in the middle off a discussion about evolution and creationism, not god...though the argument is breaking up right about now, and would apreciate it if you would stop posting in this particuler forum debate
As my dear mother used to say, "If you don`t have anything constructive to say, then shut the f*ck up"
"Yes there is"
"No there isn`t"
"Yes ther is....."
As the saying goes, "Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you`re still a retard." :-D:-D:-D
In places where malaria is an issue the proportion of the population with sickle cell anaemia is far higher than other places because the people in whom it occurs are more likely to survive and go on to reproduce.
It`s a recessive genetic trait and so requires both parents to be carriers in order to have a chance of manifesting.
Beneficial mutation: Sickle Cell Anemia. It makes you resistant to Malaria.
Maybe the talking organatan in Micheal Crichton`s Next? Probably not. ...
And to other people, this is a serious question: would you rather live with Christian Fundamentalism forcing its way into your society (America) or Islamic Fundamentalism doing the same (Europe or just the UK, I can`t remember). Also, is there a good chance the Islamic fundies can be stopped in this lifetime? I ask this as an honest question because I want to know if I have somewhere to go when the fundies are allowed to reposess Atheists` citizenship.
But yes, your understanding is poor. Someone should make a vidio to explain things more clearly
That is a poor attitude to take towards a scientific debate, theories are not disproved by a lack of evidence for them, but by evidence which contradicts them.
There are a number of good arguments in the video, especially the fossil record is problematic. However despite the clearly extensive research the video does show flaws in the author`s understand of mutation.
A counter-argument of `that doesn`t sound likely` is utterly redundant because it does nothing to disprove a theory.
From a scientific point of view there is a considerable amount of strong evidence for evolution.
Unfortunately, your challenge betrays your lack of understanding of evolutionary theory, which puts you in rather a poor position squover. At least try to understand a scientific subject before you refute it.
We need to work to unite humanity to better our meaning, to continue it as long as possible before we go extinct. Archive knowledge, explore.
If we just keep shunning science in favor or archaic stories, we`ll just burn up with the earth.
Sickle cell anaemia happens to an extremely advantageous adaptation, if you happen to have to live in an area where malaria is an issue. Therefore it is an example of adapting to the environment and is in support of evolution.
It is true that statistically almost all mutations will result in a negative outcome, this does not mean that they cannot be positive.
No organ in existence has been proven to have irreducible complexity, of course removing bits of existing organs will prevent them from functioning, that does not mean the organ could not have evolved over time.
Fossil evidence is lacking howev
The peanut butter one was entertaining, however. THAT level of ignorance is just amusing.
Plus, this stupid topic keeps re-surfacing on I Am Bored over and over and over again.
Talk about boring! :-P
Shut up. No-one`s talking to you.
Let`s debate the existence of God, or not, on an Internet forum.
"There is a God"
"Yes there is......"
Anyways, we as humans must unite behind the sciences, religious or not, and pave our specie`s path to achievement.Religion seems to instill ignorance, often even a hate, within people to science.Evolution is just one small part within the whole problem of ignorance.It also lies within politics, philosophy, morality, humility, humanity. The list goes on.
To answer your question boredfjord, no we don`t. I`m afraid it`s a purely American phenomenon.
i have no problem with the creator of this movie`s ignorance, but what pisses me off is that people will simply believe what they hear without checking the facts. i believe it was hitler who said:
If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.
he was an as.shole, an egomaniac, a racist and after stalin possibly the very worst person to ever have existed, but when it comes to propaganda, government, and the psyche of man he was spot on.
“If it should be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down” - they *always* miss the rider, "But I can find no such case."
do people who approve these things actually believe them or do they just post them because they like to see us duke it out?
So instead of citing sickle-cell as a useful mutation, maybe they could cite the human eye, or eyelashes.
These are bones from different species of animal. Ape=/=Human. However, the skulls are almost IDENTICAL. The morphology is almost identical. The genetic code is 99% IDENTICAL. Yet, these are not the same species.
He asserts that there is no relation between ape and man simply because there is a lack of fossil evidence that shows linear progression from one species to another. I would imagine that the simple shape of the video`s creator`s body and the shape of a rhesus macaque`s body would make it painfully clear that there is close relation between the two.
There is no fossil evidence of linear evolutionary progression because evolution does not work in a linear fashion.
So done your armor! Or strip it off and cast down your weapons.
We are not barbarians!WE ARE MEN!Men walk, talk, SPEAK!
So hear me, and hear yourselves.
Let this war end here...or let this war contine, your choice.
For too long we have warred, for eternity actually.
And yet I hear crying and mewling, that sickness me more than the blood, but alas, this war of ours must stop.
This war shall be the the war to end all wars.This war shall be the last.This war is not mine, not yours...This war belongs to no oneThis war has not been lostThis war will never be won
This is a fruitless battle,So I ask you now, ye men, what do you choose? Crimson? Or green? War, or peace?
Again I shall come with the document, when the skies are red.
Any site, maybe photobucket where I can post a word document?
Take it like a man!
Hatebreeding... you have to be fu(king kidding me... I guess atheist are the main cause of rascisme, hate and war right ? I`ll let you do the thinking for youerself from here.
On the idea that the earth should be littered with predecessor species--the idiot version of evolution says we descend from "monkeys." We do not. We descend from our OWN ancestors from which we evolved. Evolution doesn`t argue that there is a certain population from which two special "mutant" evolve and create an entirely new, separate population. The WHOLE population advances over time. We don`t need a million intermediary globally distributed hominid species to explain each of our million evolutions. It happened WITHIN a population! No monkeyies required, just hominid ancestors in certain phases of evolution oh which there is PLENTY of evidence.
Also, just because evolution can`t, at the moment, explain everything ever doesn`t mean your BS religion is right. Evolutionists are working to find answers. Religionists are claiming they have the answers--without any work.
"No there isn`t"
(bonus cookies for anyone who gets the movie reference)
I know, I those scientists are very deceiving. I think I read the same artical, can`t cite the source right no but I definitely remember it. I mean, they just keep spouting neolithic-age metaphysical bull without any kind of peer-review process, or citing any previous scientific sources, or providing any evidence of their "findings". Just the other day there was a scientist on the BBC talking about the Space Station. He was full of sh*t, just abusing his PhD degree and position as Professor Emeritus at Cambridge University, as if that made him an authority.
Damn it. Get a life. All this stupid post does is breed hate.
For all the people sick of the religious debates.. remember this.
You`re not being forced to read them. You are viewing them on your own will, and are free to move about the site to other links of more interest. I don`t see why we can`t just have the people that like it read it, and the people that don`t like it look at something else.
It`s REALLY simple. If it hurts your hand when you stick it in the fire, TAKE IT OUT, DUMBASS!
What`s even worse than that is when they claim their logic is infallible.
That really gets my goat.
I don`t care what religion, there is always going to be "I am right, you are wrong" debates. Needless to say, you can`t win going into a debate with the debaters both in the frame of mind that their logic is unfowlable.
Me, I believe both Evolution and Creation.... God made us, and we became what we are today.
I don`t charge into churches on a sunday morning an yell "WE ARE DESCENDED FROM A COMMON APE-LIKE ANCESTOR! THE EARTH WAS NOT CREATED IN SIX DAYS, 6000 YEARS AGO! THERE WAS NO BIG BOAT WHICH CARRIED ALL OF EARTH`S SPECIES!"
Listen, whatever helps people sleep at night. I won`t try to disprove god (many have tried, but failed. It`s like trying to disprove Santa Claus. We can`t prove he doesn`t exist, so therefore, he must). And religious folks, please don`t try to stand in the way of progress. Leave that to us scientists (you know, the folks who designed the plastic-and-silicon-chip computer which your fingers are touching)
I don`t mind them believing what they want, but when they start denying facts... :P
* The "Overmann Medal" is a virtual (and yet, at the same time, metaphysically real) award bestowed upon individuals or groups on i-am-bored.com, for `Unselfish Services to Rational Free Thought in the Face of Overwhelming Idiocy`.
There are, and have been, legions of faiths and belief systems that involve a heavenly being creating the world and people. Any one of them could be The Creator.
Or, conversely, it could have been none of them.
The Big Bang theory, incidentally, does not say the universe started out from nothing. It says that the evidence shows that the universe used to be smaller, and the Big Bang was really just a period of massive expansion.
So where did the universe come from? Perhaps it was the remnants of a universe that collapsed into a black hole that sucked everything in on itself, into what`s known as a singularity. It`s something so unimaginable tiny, yet it contained all the matter and energy we have now. For some reason, it expanded suddenly and rapidly, which was what we call the Big Bang.
He says throughout the video the statement "it is obvious that" this is not true or this is true, when it is not obvious. He says "well evolution doesnt explain this" so creationism must be true, which isnt correct.He makes a point that there should be millions of intermediate animal fossils, but there arent. There are many such fossils, its as if this person is just making up points randomly. If the changes are only slight, then it would be diffucult to judge the difference between a cat and a cat with a slightly longer tail.Then he says "well since a certain type of bug hasnt evolved over millions of years, then evolution must not exist", which doesnt make sense because the bug need not change if its fit to survive.
Such an idiot...
The Miller-Urey experiment was executed under conditions we now know were not so.
There are useful-mutations.
There are fossils of the transitional form.
Very little of what our writer posted in that video was based on fact. In actuality most of it was just citing other information out of context and omitting important information that would lead you to realize he`s full of it.
Sickle Cell Anemia for instance has the benefit of making the person with the mutation immune to certain disorders.
Also, if you went about quoting every bloody paleantologist as the gospel truth, you`d have thousands of different ideas about what the same creature did and was like when it was alive.
Playing into emotions by calling proponents of the theory he is trying to debunk "Liars" is just childish.
Terrible argument, full of holes, blas
The two have nothing really to do with each other. One explains how life began, the other explains how life continues.
Further evidence for common descent, which I don`t think has been mentioned, is insulin production. We can take a gene that codes for insulin production right out of a human strand of DNA and implant it into a bacterium that will produce insulin like it`s been doing it forever, and will split and divide into millions of bacteria, all of which will also produce insulin.
The fact that humans and bacteria are compatible for swapping genes only serves to reinforce the fact of common descent; that all life originated from a single source.
that vid was a nice recap of why evolution is an epic fail bs. but the vid doesn`t show that God cares for us or anything, just that evolution is not the right answer.
Azacam, yes there is a bit of a reversal here, it`s called PROGRESS. Remember when people thought the Earth was flat and people were burning `witches` left and right? Yeah, let`s go back to that. People were SO much happier then. Would you call a Scientologist a crackpot? They have faith that Zenu exists, Hindu`s believe that cows are holy, Muslims believe in Muhammad, Christians believe in Jesus, etc. Your reasoning is moronic. We`re not learning about the universe, OH NO, we`re just learning how GOD DOES IT ALL. Oh give me a fu<k*ng break. The idea of god brings up even MORE QUESTIONS. You can`t explain the universe with god anymore than you can with... a... magical plate of BACON. Where the HELL did god come from? How did an infinitly complex and all-knowing being such as god come to be? It makes no sense. I don`t know if god exists or not, no one does, so don`t assume. The universe is beautiful enough without magic thank you.
And BTW, I know it`s not funny, but it is clever...
You basically confirmed everything I said.
"There is no god, bytches!"
"Yes there is, non-nice individuals"
I have never seen one being built ... (dream job).You cant "google" creation ... yet. The more science learns about the universe it might one day be possible, in a few hundred/thousand years.
But have you ever seen anyone create a universe? Have you ever seen a universe "factory" or "building site" or something similar? Can a Google search give you the plans for building the universe? Do you know anyone who makes universes for a living? I`d say the answers to all of these questions are "no."
That is why we disregard Creationism as fantasy. From an objective standpoint, it makes no sense whatsoever.
No point? So I suppose you don`t care if your beliefs are true? If you don`t care then that`s all well and good, but the rest of us do. Also, stop getting mad every time someone posts something about religion, Atheism, or Evolution. No one forced you to watch the video.Another thing: I could be wrong, but it seems most of the people saying these things are in my age group (13-17), i.e. the thus far uneducated. It`s incredibly sad when people, especially those this young, have no interest in science, even though it is what allows you to live the way you do. Y`know, with this fancy computer thing that lets you go on i-a-b.
"The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."— Thoma
I already stated that this was because Lions and Tigers are highly ordered organisms that are extremly hard to improve.
Ligers are imperfect but they exist and that fact alone is proof enough of the evolution theory.
Dont ask questions just do it.
Now think and ask yourself this "Is this rock alive?" your logic and everything you`ve been taught about life tells you that the rock is not alive but the rock itself is made out of DNA, the same stuff that made you so just because it dosen`t move or breath or have a pulse dosen`t mean it`s not alive, it only mean that, by your standard, this rock is not alive.
There are combinaison of DNA that give birth to what we call "living things" and other that give birth to what we call "non-living" things. When a DNA patern is created it may end up positive or negative / alive or dead.
The more you know.
As for the Big Bang stuff:Please just stop. The creation of the universe told through scientific knowledge just boggles my mind to a degree of pain. I definitely agree with the scientific view, but I just can`t think about it. If I do, I over-think. And that sucks.
Liger can`t reproduce themselves because the DNA of the male Liger is made that way ( Because of mutation of the DNA over time, if it would have been made otherwise maybe they would have been fertile but DNA are very complex and fellow a system like everything else, just like maths ).
Soon scientists will be able to decode the DNA of any living species and de-evolve them to see how they came to be and from there they will be able to create new breed and prove evolution.
Anyway I have finally developed my complete hypothesis on the Origins of Life.
1. All life was not created in 7 days2. Life was created.3. Some species dominate certain eras because their traits allowed the to prosper and other might have become extinct or close to extinct.4. Once the era changes, another already existing species just becomes more populated.5. Natural selection would eliminate some species.6. Mutations do occur but do not make a dinosaur into a chicken. I`m thinking more making a dinosaur into a dinosaur that is a few feet taller. Or maybe with longer claws.7. List are awesome
about evolution/creationism go to this awesome site:http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
it debunks most if not all of the bs he spewed in that video.
There might be something out there but it`s far beyond our grasp to tell what it is. We`re inside the bubble and we just can`t see outside.
Prove me wrong.
Let both sides believe what they want, it doesn`t hurt anyone unless they try to forcefully impose their beliefs on others.
Does this person realize that people with sickle cell anemia cannot get malaria?
Some of those rocks, bones and slime that we have dug up from the ocean floor and dated as 55 million years old may be our best chance to understand the climate change we face in the next few centuries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene-E... - a sudden warming event known to be due to a massive CO2 release.
Just one example of how pure science can end up being very relevant to social matters. There are thousands more. More importantly, the pursuit of knowledge FOR ITS OWN SAKE is one of the things that makes us human. So don`t rubbish it.
I`ll just point one of the very many things incorrect in this video: sickle-cell anemia is considered to benefit the person since people with it CANNOT GET MALARIA. Sickle-cell anemia is much more common in people of African descent, since they come from a location where malaria is widespread. That right there could be called `evolution` and disproves your whole worthless video.
On second thought, I’ll just leave the link.
This debate’s getting old already
That vid is an OPINION, his sources UNRELIABLE.
And the fact is, creations don`t seem to fully understand evolution
And one word people- retrovirus.
Finish all your pills and antibiotics, otherwise the bacteria and viruses ill evoluve and you can`t get rid of them
Ok. Here`s the funny part to take away from this, it took less time to prove him a liar, definitly, than it did for him to try to prove evolutionists liars, and he was the one trying to prove some one a liar in the first place. What I`ve said really goes to display the credibility of this guy, and the noncredibility of this video is what`s important to get. Cheers.
Also evolution has DEFINITLY been proven in bacteria, i can`t see how he could say evolution has never been proven in any way, it`s really obvious espetially in the new antibiotic resistant bacteria which have killed several people in hospitals this past year.
Furthermore evolution in Symbiosis is VERY easy to prove, just take a look at simultanious Müllerian Mimicary. That seems like a difficult thing to understand by the wording and it is, but it`s not critical to point out, just another idea to add.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_o...Ok, so, how do we explain the bones in whales that ended up there...because they evolved from land predetors?
That`s purely for continuity and who`s "we"? Your cat? :)
you act like my little sister actully though, but I actually hope you enjoy your stay here in he end honestly, Turnshroud.
Also, parts of one testement contradict what the other says.
Not to mention, as I said a miillion times befiore, it has been changed time and time again, therefore an uunreliable source
Someone should really but that vid, in actual text over here....
"Many creationists consider Java Man to be a large ape, but it is far more humanlike and has a far larger brain size than any ape, and the skull is similar to other Homo erectus skulls. It is also frequently claimed that Eugene Dubois, the discoverer of Java Man, later decided it was only a large gibbon, but this claim is not true."
The Miller-Urey experiment was never intended to create life. What it did was simply extraordinary, producing the building blocks of life. It is far more evidence for evolution than against it.
"Amazingly, a century after scientists knew otherwise, most creationists still believe that Neandertals were merely modern humans, deformed by diseases such as rickets, arthritis or syphilis. Some, but by no means all, Neandertals have been found with signs of health problems such as arthritis. But Neandertals have many distinctive features, and there is no reason why these diseases (or any others) would cause many, let alone all, of these features on even one, let alone many, individuals. Modern knowledge and experience also contradicts the idea that disease is a cause of Neandertal features, because these diseases do not cause modern humans to look like Neandertals." - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_n...
If these arguements are all Christians have to fall back on I seriously worry about inteligent sane humans who still believe creati
I swear he put the wrong quotes up, everything he says seems to actually be contradicted by the quotes he chose, or out of context!
Here`s one for you, "God created everything" "God looked at the world and said it was good" Thus abortions, genetic engineering, satanic rituals, rape, stem cells, murder, canabalism, beastiality... All good in God`s eyes!
And then right before saying "That is evidence for creation". He even forgot to realize that the oppinion was supporting THE OPPOSITE of a disagreement with evolution.... It was supporting the other side, some of his own biggest "evidence" (oppinion) was actually disagreeing with him and just saying "these changes arose very quickly" not that the changes were false, in fact many people beleive that species shifts and changes do arise very quickly in groupings. This has nothing to do with disproving evolution, evolution agrees with that.
He should take a degree in Geological Sciences, focussing on palaeobiology. Then he`ll understand evolution a lot better.
And the human body, animal bodies are FILLED with evidence. We have vesicular structures in our body know useless. When you look at certain embryos, some contain similar parts, but turn in to different animals.When humans migrated from Africa, there skin became lighter because of evolution.When a child is born with dark hair, that means one parent lacked the dominant recessive, evolution can work the same way.
Speciation can also happen because of evolution/
To previous anti-religion debate- the debate to end all debates? Wasn`t WWI the war to end all wars? That didn`t work. Leave us be. There is apparently such a thing as a non-extremist Christian that is intelligent. If you are tired of the debating down in the Debate Hall, you are welcome to go to another room.
Shouldn’t the lobe-finned fish be proof? That fish had a genetic mutation that was passed on from generation to generation. Why? Because it was useful.Animals developed mutations to escape predators, become better...etc.
Evolution absolutaly does NOT happen in an even way as it`s pointed out by this guy, there is huge idea in evolution which very much supports a LACK of EVEN distribution of "transitional" species as he calls them. There is a lack of even distribution of transitional species because there isn`t SUPPOSED to be an even distribution in the first place, the fact he admits there is an unevness proves evolution if anything. Don`t let me explain it all though, let the university of Berkley do that for me:
He said he was going to PROVE evolution false, and he put a very clearly defined OPPINION in his video.
Parts of the human body develop and remove new organs all the time, in fact that`s the whole reason we have people born without Plantaris muscles. Scientists have actually traced the gene responsible for this too. New organs happen all the time.
Just because the expriment he mentioned could not synthesize all the amino acids does not indicate ireducible complexity (which is a wrong idea in the first place). In fact Most people can synthesize 23 amino acids and some can synthesize *24* because some people have gained the ability to make Selenocysteine a new amino acid. let me say that in another way, the complexity in being able to create certain number of amino acids can be simplified, it is not ireducibly complex.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
Practically all scientific evidence point toward evolution in the same way that practically all scientific evidence tells us that we orbit the sun, or are part of a spiral galaxy.
This does NOT mean that there is no God, nor does it mean that such a God could not have created the universe. If we agree that God would be all powerful, then God could have made evolution. Or, if you want to go crazy, God could have made all the evidence of evolution as a ploy to "test the faith" of mankind.
The thing is, no matter how much we yell at each other in the IAB forums, none of us will ever KNOW the truth. We can come up with some pretty good educated guesses, and we can believe, but we will never know.
Unless someone here happens to be a prophet. Then they might know.
Wow, so many BS statements strung together that are profoundly incorrect. So by the above statement, mentally handicapped males mate with chicks just as often than normal males. Thus producing an omni-directional evolutional result of normal and f`d up children.
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." -- Thomas Jefferson
why such the issues? get over it and leave our comic forum alone, dood!
Please, for the sake of everyone here, stop smokin crack cocaine, ok?
Live your life with the goal of Being happy. strive to be wise, strive to live the life you have been given. Live every day to the fullest, as no one knows what happens after death, and anyone or any book that says they do is a liar. Treat death as the worst possible thing you can imagine, and live your life well in the time you have, as you may die in 10 minutes, tomorrow, next week, a year from now or maybe you`ll live to be 120... If you live your life fully, live it the way you want, and live with the goal of your happiness, while not encroaching on the happiness of others, your life will be fulfilled when you die.
Where we come from is something to ponder, but you have no guarantee that anything before this very moment was real, so arguing about it is rather silly, and rather stupid. It is a total waste of time, and you could be doing better things like figuring out how to make life a little better, or how to make someone else happy...
The Fact of the matter is that where we came from is incredibly trivial compared to the question of "What do we do while we are here?" and the answer to that is simple, can be agreed by almost everyone, and is stated time and again in every holy book of every religion. Treat others with respect and compassion. Do not kill, torture, enslave, rape, or commit other unethical crimes against anyone else. Live your life with the goal
Fact: Evolution occurs.Assumption: Evolution has always occurred.
It is impossible to deny evolution. The creationists try to say that evolution had a starting point. The burden of proof currently lies with creationists on that point.
3) "Mutations are always destructive in an ordered system". First, no, they`re not *always* destructive. Second it depends what you mean by an ordered system.
Obviously with something that has been honed over 3 billion years, new changes cause problems. With a single celled organism, the changes are more likely to be positive.
In humans, useful mutation is rare. With certain plants however: Useful mutations can be 3 times more common than harmful.
IAB used to be a links site, now i`s a political/religious debate forum. WTF?
You`re saying she did because you`re frustrated at not being able to actually answer. Don`t worry. Put all that rage away. It wasn`t a very good argument. It`s *OK* that you didn`t know the answer. Deep breaths.
However, maybe next time address the points at hand (I.e. Defend Evolution/go learn something), rather than attacking religion. Attacking them doesn`t make you right.
Some things people haven`t brought up:1) There are known hoaxes. The author pointed some out. These are not the basis of evolution, and therefore debunking them does not debunk evolution. Furthermore it is EVOLUTIONISTS who have shown they were hoaxes.
It`s the equivalent of debunking a magic trick with a floating woman, then going "See the woman isn`t REALLY flying! Therefore there is no such thing as powered flight".
Seriously, stop with the idiotic atheist and creationist videos. They are made of fail.
ignore it not worth it
"When he/she talks about transitional species in evolution, he states that there would need to be more of the predecessor than there is of the current type, which is entirely false considering the fact that... I don`t know... animals have sex? You`d only need two that are capable of survival to prolong the species."
You would need more than two animals to prolong the species because as we all know that evolution takes MILLIONS of years, so to say that there would only need to be two animals to evolve would be alot faster than MILLIONS of years. I may have misunderstood you on that though.
At least he does make some valid logical points, although lack of evidence is a poor reason to debunk a theory. The earlier post(10 Questions) about the existence of god suffers from some of the same logic. Both simply take a given theory and argue the opposite. Anyone who has studied debates knows that it is always easier for someone to argue the negative, because the burden of truth is on the positive side.
This is how one of the most famous debaters, Socrates, worked. He could simply ask a question, and very elegantly continue asking, "why," He merely had to wait until his opponent inevitably said something that could be taken as a contradiction and seized that.
Anyway, the point is that you can debunk any argument. The true question is whether or not these videos are actually proving anything. I, taking a cue from the great debaters prefer to argue the negative on that.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and this is mine.
I have never seen a video more wrong in my life.
I wish there were more atheist-hackers so that they could DOS attack the crap out of stuff like this.
It`s cool and stuff, the original hydrogen in the atmosphere apparently came from the collision between the earth and the moon.
DONT POKE THE TIGER
WHATS THE MATTER WITH YOU PEOPLE!?!let the sleeping dog lie. -_-no more religious crap.you believe stuff that we dont.dealwithit