I havnt looked at any websites dude since I've started this thread. All knowledge from my years of studying real science and not some concocted garbage from evolutionists sites dude. 😐
Evolution or not?
Sort:
The only evidence from the fossil record has humans with a one or two percent combination with Neanderthals and Denisovans, and even that is suspect. That means we didn't descend from either one. There is no proof that humans came from an ape like creature. Its just hypothetical scenarios and story time.
well,think of it.How often spontaneous mutation could be happen on a species.If it was unable to be predicted,then creating a time frame asumption would be too risky.A new species could be came up in short time period.If so,magic and science can't be distinguished.I think of the magic behind spontaneous mutation from physics perspective.
Exactly Optimissed dude. That's why the conclusions drawn from the evolutionist dudes 2005 chromosomal draft study has made them look foolish. The more recent one ( also done by evolutionists ) shows we didn't descend from ape-like dude creatures. ☺
BTW, their more recent study wasn't a draft study but mapped every nucleotide and therefore is highly accurate, unlike their first study which only mapped a few nucleotides and assumed the rest were the same. 😉
The marble theory is a hypothetical scenario Optimissed, unless of course you can show from what creatures the Cambrian animals descended from. 😕
Common sense would tell us that if there were no precursors than they had a different and unique origin, which suggests that we could have had a unique origin also. Might want to study up a little. 😊
And the Cambrian animals descended from nothing. How could that be? 😕
Dawkins makes my point pretty well. 'It's as if they were planted there'.
This argument is getting confusing.
The Cambrian animals appeared on the scene approximately 525 million years ago Muhammed. Within 5-6 million years during the Adtabanian and Tommotian periods of the Cambrian 16 phyla, 30 classes, and many more orders, families and species appeared in the geological record for the first time. They had completely new body plans with completely new body structures, organs, digestive systems, skeletons, nervous systems, brains, circulatory networks, etc., that had never been seen before.
The interesting thing about the Cambrian period is that
there are no proceeding animal forms from which the Cambrian animals could possibly have evolved from. Well, a few annealids and that's about it.
Gould summed it up by saying, 'The idea of smoothly transitioning forms will no longer wash'.
Yes einstein.This should remind us with Aristotle fallacy.It is when he failed to predict free fall object based on his present experiences of weighing.He predicted the heavier object will fall faster than the lighter.Our present experiences is not always suitable to judge other phenomena.Because it could be a completely different experience.
Evolution is largely irrelevent for modern day society.
Except for the lagging ability to digest alcohol (American Indians) and digest lactose in cow's milk (African Americans), there has hardly been any "evolution" of the human species over most of recorded history -- the past 10,000 years of human society.
We live in Society, not in a jungle or savannah (from 5 million years ago). The speed of evolution is absolutely glacial compared to the speed of "societal evolution."
The hockey stick phenomena of human advancement comes with capitalism (circa 1600 to today). And there has been damn little human biological evolution in the past 400 years.
On balance, the evolution debate today is largely for people who want to throw tomatoes at religion, or at the secular materialists and atheists.
The compendium of threads on this crazy topic gives evidence to this overwhelming tendency -- to simply butt heads. 
alex-rodriguez wrote:
Here's a question for readers -- wasn't that an incredibly banal TED talk in post #518 ?
"Cooking made us human" ???
That video was excellent. I have heard this before. Cooking made it possible for the human brain to evolve to become larger. A large brain requires a lot of energy and cooking food solved that problem.
Unitary causation is the refuge of pinheads, and Scientism.
Please make a note of it.
Yeah I probably will, but I want to study the whole thing on my own first so I don't get false information from people who don't know what they're talking about.
Oh, but it does Optimissed. If genomic information is building up slowly, then you wouldn't expect some bacteria to have bigger genomes than humans. You also wouldn't expect genome variations of a hundred fold within families of animals. These aren't gene duplications or junk DNA from bad mutations just sitting around, this is designed information which is necessary for the animals function. One would expect all kinds of mutational screw ups sitting around if random processes had any real creative power. They would also weigh the cell down to the point of not being able to function. Due to the fact that we don't see any sitting around suggests that random processes don't really have much of a role in evolutionary processes. What we do see are really amazingly designed creatures.
Not rationalizing Optimissed, I'm reasoning. If you see some flaws in my reasoning let me know, because I would want to be the first to correct it.
einstein99 wrote:
The Cambrian animals appeared on the scene approximately 525 million years ago Muhammed. Within 5-6 million years during the Adtabanian and Tommotian periods of the Cambrian 16 phyla, 30 classes, and many more orders, families and species appeared in the geological record for the first time. They had completely new body plans with completely new body structures, organs, digestive systems, skeletons, nervous systems, brains, circulatory networks, etc., that had never been seen before.
The interesting thing about the Cambrian period is that
there are no proceeding animal forms from which the Cambrian animals could possibly have evolved from. Well, a few annealids and that's about it.
Gould summed it up by saying, 'The idea of smoothly transitioning forms will no longer wash'.
Noone ever claimed that the fossil record is complete. Blank spaces in biological histoy must be expected.
It's the same with human history, there are many blank spaces. But with human history, noone has a problem with that. If we dont know who built some castle or subway station, people can realize themselves its just because the knowledge got lost im time. Noone goes "WE DONT KNOW WHO BUILT THIS CASTLE SO IT MUST HAVE CAME OUTTA NOWHERE" lol.
Newton, Kepler, Maxwell, Bohr, Mendel, Hubble, Curie, Salk, Sandage, Kenyon were science deniers. 😃
einstein99 wrote:
Oh, but it does Optimissed. If genomic information is building up slowly, then you wouldn't expect some bacteria to have bigger genomes than humans. You also wouldn't expect genome variations of a hundred fold within families of animals. These aren't gene duplications or junk DNA from bad mutations just sitting around, this is designed information which is necessary for the animals function. One would expect all kinds of mutational screw ups sitting around if random processes had any real creative power. They would also weigh the cell down to the point of not being able to function. Due to the fact that we don't see any sitting around suggests that random processes don't really have much of a role in evolutionary processes. What we do see are really amazingly designed creatures.
it doesnt necessary build up slowly, some mutations can cause duplications of long pieces of DNA. maybe its good to have more copies of the same DNA in some cases, for instance if radiaton messes up the DNA, it could be handy to have a good copy for the proteine. SO it could be that these guys live in strongly mutagene envireoments?
bacteria also DO dump DNA if they dont need it, they build up resistence to antibiotics for instance by evolution, but then loose the resistence if they dont encounter the antibiotic for some time, because smaller DNA means faster replication.
Then again, you are arguing as if you knew already what the bacteria (what's its name btw?) does with its massive DNA. We just dont know all about them yet, and we wont for probably several hundred years. It makes no sense to say "its got a big genome, i dont have a flying idea what the bacteria does with it, so therefore, design".
Antiscience people often vastly overestimate how much science knows and expects you can pick any bacteria (our of billions of species), weird shrub or jellyfish, point at any part of thir genome and then the scientists can tell what it does. When they cant they think "omg its all wrong".
Biology never claimed they know everything about every organism, far from it. Its more like in the vert beginning of it. We dont even know yet what lives on the bottom of the oceans, and not so many years ago they discovered the extremophiles and so on. There are many weird things they dont understand yet. You just gotta accept the unsecurity of it, that we know many things but other things we just flat out dont know about yet.
alex-rodriguez wrote:
In America there is a never ending war against science. Why? What's the problem? Why do science deniers deny the established truth of evolution by natural selection even though it's the strongest fact of science, supported by thousands of evidences from several branches of science?
The problem is the science deniers want to throw out science and replace it with their magical ideas. That's very strange because magic is just a childish fantasy and most certainly magic is not real.
There could nothing more anti-science than magic. So people who want to defend their magical ideas have to attack science, they have to attack scientists, and worst of all they have to attack science education.
Can this terrible problem be fixed? Can these people be cured, or is there some way to at least keep them from destroying science education?
So far it doesn't look good here in Idiot America. The science deniers always lose in court but that doesn't prevent them from harassing and threatening biology teachers, or trying to get laws passed to dumb down science education to accommodate their magical ideas.
Sometimes I think there is no hope for this country. We will forever be an international laughing stock.
I dont know if they are SO anti-science, i only think they have a problem with evolution and also climate science.
Its funny that when physics tell them super weird things like "time and space can be bent" and "we have succeded in freezing light" and such they just go "o well, he is a physicists and makes formulas, and if he says that time bends in the fourth dimension and he can freeze light, then thats all cool for me!"
But when they say that human and chimpansees are related (but 7 BILLION years ago!) which is something everyone can see really, 2 arms, 2 legs, many same facial expressions, both use tools, etc., many people guessed that by themselves before evolution theory, then they go all balistic :)
Two separate studies dude. The 2005 study was a draft study. That means only small pieces of the genomes were used and the rest were assumed to be analagous. Approximetely 700 nucleotide length sequence files were used. It was a five fold study.
The MSY chimp/human study was done last fall by evolutionists from MIT I believe, can't remember for sure.
It concluded that the chimp/human Y-chromosome comparisons were around 50% similar. If you look at the ideagrams they really don't look alike at all.
Just Google chimp/human y-chromosome study.
Its written by evolutionists dude. The 2005 study that has been thrown around for years was a train wreck dude.