[Blueblaze]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

You mean, speculating that we share a common ancestor.

The theory of evolution goes back to fish climbing out of the sea and eventually becoming human. Where is the proof that a fish became a mammal?

A two percent difference is all that is needed to be a different species.

It goes back much farther than fishes becoming mammals. It goes all the way back to stars becoming planets, and atoms becoming stars.

If the 98% DNA we share with chimpanzees isn't enough to prove that, if we didn't evolve from chimps, we at least had a common ancestor, than what's your explanation? Random chance? God "poofed" everything into existence simultaneously 6,000 years ago because you think your holy book says so? (It doesn't, by the way). Do you have any inkling of the number of atoms involved? Try to imagine the trillions upon trillions of coincidences that would be necessary for that to happen! And then try to explain why a significant portion of your DNA is also identical to that found in insects and jellyfish!

The question isn't whether evolution is a fact. The question is how all of those coincidences could happen without a plan. Evolution doesn't disprove God, any more than understanding how an airplane works disproves flight. The astounding level of coincidence necessary for evolution to work is the best evidence that, not only does He exist, he's the ultimate engineer!

Why do people expect a book written for people living when Ramses II was alive to be scientifically accurate 3,000 years later? A holy book, even one dictated by God himself, doesn't have to be scientifically precise in order to be true. You've heard of parables, right? The creation story wasn't written to explain quantum mechanics. It was written to explain why people behave so badly. Even the story itself isn't contextually consistent on its face. Where did Cain and Able's wives come from? Not important to the story, so it's not included -- just like the details of how God created Man from dust -- star dust, over about 4 billion years.

[HJBeck]

Originally Posted by Rich Iwaszko

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we continue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

Nothing in the Bible has been proven, does that mean nothing in it can be true either? Guess we need to bring back the monkey trials!!!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

So is the choice between evolution and creation? Did things "just happen" and then bumbled along haphazardly from there, resulting in the world we have today? Sorry, I don't buy it. The reason is as follows.

"Most people know about DNA (aka deoxyribonucleic acid) as the molecule that holds the information, i.e. the genetic codes, within our bodies. What some people don’t realise is that this equates to a seriously large amount of information being stored within a single biomolecule. DNA molecules can store up to 215 petabytes, or 215 million gigabytes, of data in a single doubled stranded molecule, making it one of the highest storage density mediums in the world. Simply put, the information storage devices within our bodies are much more capable than we can currently create, so there has been a lot of focus in trying to harness the power and data storage capabilities of DNA for our own man-made data storage systems." (Electro pages: storing information and data with DNA). ONE petabyte contains 500 billion pages of standard printed text. Multiply that by 215... I am not sure I can comprehend a number that large. That number is contained in a "database" if you can call it that, that exists on a submicroscopic level. Asking somebody to believe that that "just happened" is beyond ludicrous. The watch proves the existence of the watchmaker

That said, I'm not convinced that the fossil record is solid proof of anything. So few living things become fossils; conditions have to be just right for fossilization to happen. I recall hearing something recently that may be one in 100,000 animals or plants become fossils, and even with the ones that do become fossils, there is no guarantee that they will be found, or that they will not be destroyed in some natural event such as a flood, volcano, or whatever. To me, expecting the fossil record to be a reliable chronology of development is like depending on a calendar with maybe five numbers on it to be the reliable chronology of the number of days in a decade.

But we can use reasoning. We know, or think we know, two things. Fossils exist, and the earth changes. Oftentimes those changes in the earth are widespread and drastic. Assuming the existence of a creator God, we can also assume intelligence and foreknowledge on the part of that God. If God created the physical environment to change, as it does, then is it not reasonable to assume that God also provided the life he created to adapt according to the changes of the physical environment? Again, assuming the existence of that God, the answer cannot be no. The proof is that we are here.

I have never seen evolution versus creation as an either/or thing. In my mind they exist together working perfectly in tandem. They always have.

I like your concluding statement and I don't specifically disagree with anything in that well-written and explained post I am just trying to see where THIS factor comes into play.........I believe that I have read a long time ago that the difference in DNA between MONKEY and MAN is extremely small - I am just wondering how that fits in?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

They probably teach evolution because they've found "missing links" for nearly every line -- from humans to horses, to sharks, to whales, to aardvarks and dinosaurs. It's a "theory" the same way gravity is just a "theory". The proof is so obvious and everywhere that that you need to invent a religion in order to ignore it.

What's really amazing, is the incredible string of coincidences that must occur in order to preserve a fossil. I'm astounded that we have even one fossil of Lucy -- our ape-man "missing link" ancestor known as Australopithecus. In fact, we have dozens of examples. It's yet another example of the ludicrous impossibility of our universe.

And it's yet more evidence that our universe was engineered by a bored deity, and not the result of rolling a seven umpteen trillion times.

i "theorize" that religion was NOT invented to disprove evolution. Rather it was invented by some individual
(or probably many individuals in many places and times) - who sought to establish himself (or herself) with a magical, yet not provable, special ability to predict events - and thus get and DESERVE some special benefits or treatments. These SPECIAL PEOPLE got to wear special animal furs, robes, clothes or jewelry designed to prove that they are SPECIAL.

Religion occurred way back in primitive man times - way before scientists theorized about evolution.

Also, I am confused by the post's concluding statements. Maybe they are sarcasm. But, they don't seem to agree with the earlier paragraphs?

[Berwin]

Even the Pope has said that evolution is a fact.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

I am amazed that a human being can watch a virus evolve from deadly to harmless in a mere three years, and still claim that there is no proof for the "theory" of evolution.

And I am amazed that a human being can understand that the same virus is comprised of the same chains of the same proteins found in a human cell nucleus, and yet, insist that we have no common ancestor with that virus -- because when Darwin first noticed evolution and described it in 1859, he didn't include all the answers to every question about evolution in his book.

And I am astounded that the same person will then point to his Holy Book, which was written 3,000 years before the discovery of DNA, and tell you that evolution cannot possibly be true because it is not mentioned in his 3,000-year-old Holy Book. He'll then go on to tell you that there has not been enough time for evolution to work because the Universe is only 6,000 years old. He knows this because he added up the ages of all the people mentioned in his Holy Book, and that's the number he got.

Simply astounding!

OK. That post did NOT confuse me and I agree with it.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Berwin

Even the Pope has said that evolution is a fact.

WELL! If the Pope says so then it must be true. Right?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

They probably teach evolution because they've found "missing links" for nearly every line -- from humans to horses, to sharks, to whales, to aardvarks and dinosaurs. It's a "theory" the same way gravity is just a "theory". The proof is so obvious and everywhere that that you need to invent a religion in order to ignore it.

What's really amazing, is the incredible string of coincidences that must occur in order to preserve a fossil. I'm astounded that we have even one fossil of Lucy -- our ape-man "missing link" ancestor known as Australopithecus. In fact, we have dozens of examples. It's yet another example of the ludicrous impossibility of our universe.

And it's yet more evidence that our universe was engineered by a bored deity, and not the result of rolling a seven umpteen trillion times.

There is one animal species that scientists have no prior evolutionary links for. At least it was that way when I asked my Anthropology Professor about it 40 yeas ago (so things may have changed. The animal "dolphin" suddenly appeared some? number or thousand years ago. They suddenly appeared in the anthropological records for some unknown reason. I have never since seen a discussion or explanation about that. But, then again, I was never curious enough to look into the subject further.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Why do we need a deep thinkers two?

To answer THAT question...........see post number 8.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by DAVES

Taught in schools? "Science is fact not fictional theories." So much Science taught in schools is not fact but SPUN current thought. We all know the earth is flat and the planets revolve around the earth. Much of education is indoctrination. Few teachers are educated enough, bright enough or have the time to discuss these things.

Is that sarcasm? Help me Sheldon.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by Decadeofdave

I feel like I walked into a mensa meeting.

I am a member but I have NEVER attended a meeting. Sometimes people are so bright they can be rather reclusive, anti-social, and/or lack people skills. The small talk and discussions in their magazine was enough to tell me not to go to a meeting.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

Yes, viruses can evolve. And species can evolve but there has never been any absolute proof of one species evolving into another.

I know that it can happen in the reverse direction. The Alaskan Brown Bear was considered for years as a different species than the Grizzle Bear. But, something proved that they were REALLY the same specie. Either DNA proved that or scientists just decided to AGREE to that, I am not sure. I would NOT be surprised if humans started out as a virus, and then became some kind of tadpole, then a fish. then a fish that walked on land, ETC, ETC until BINGO a human. And then these humans invented language, and then invented religion, and then started classifying things, and then, of course, started arguments.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I think that is just semantics. Who has the authority to elevate a theory into a law?

Sky Daddy.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Hmmmmm.

Say that the poster was not an MD, but instead a mechanic: the guy who fixes complicated automobiles about which we rank-and-filers know little or nothing. Would that mechanic be justified in believing that the complicated machinery upon which he works "just happened", or would he have to admit that, at some point along the evolution of machinery, there had to be some sort of intelligent design?

Everyone knows that automobiles evolved from go-karts which evolved from legos. Geez. Of course the doctor is right, aren't they always? Just ask them. I cannot tell you the number of moronic MD's and JDs I have met or dealt with in my life - as if the letters after their name entitle them to certain status of "knowing all." They do not. I don't walk around adding B.S./M.S. after my name. In fact, I rarely admit to possessing the documents.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Decadeofdave

I feel like I walked into a mensa meeting.

Yes, and we are deadly serious - no one is "mensa"-ing around here!