|
btw Dun = doesn't
ooc: I've been thinking about it and Evolution what prove is their for it? We had this question during class And My teacher played the disbeliever (we had no real disbeliever unfortunatly) and i pushed my teacher so far back in his arguments he started using "God Created this to throw us of of the truth" Basicly I'm gonna play the disliever (unless we got some real disbeliever) And you try confincing me Evolution exists. <font color="ff99ff"> ic Evolution dun Exist because... You Caint Proof it </font> ooc I have better but this one is so hard to proof wrong ------------------ http://www.phpshop.net/images/rikard/rikard2.gif Konfuzed, of Konfuzed and Zany, Bad Writerz Klub [This message has been edited by Rikard (edited 10-30-2001).] |
hey you can check some of the arguments here about evolution... well its human evolution... in my post http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif
http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/No...ML/004714.html ------------------ Revived I Am to hunt this world... Banish ye evil or face my wrath... |
There's a counter-argument to everything, so as long as you can keep digging them up, nobody can offer undeniable proof countering or supporting the theory of Evolution.
------------------ No-Name Face |
Quote:
------------------ Revived I Am to hunt this world... Banish ye evil or face my wrath... |
Quote:
One thing to consider is that as a scientific theory if it has no proof then it is worthless. It's not even a real theory, only a hypothesis. They try to ride it in on the coattails of the theory of natural selection to make people think it's true. But in fact the isn't enough hard scientific evidence to support it to amount for diddly squat. Some people say, "well the same can be said for creation". The difference is that creation is not a scientific theory and is based on faith not scientific evidence. It can be true without concrete proof. |
if you think about it humans have developed into almost an anti evolutionary being. Plants and animals continue to evolve as they live by the basic principle of survival of the fitest. Human evolved so far because medicine could heal the injured and dying but could keep the healthy in that state. Once medicines were able to save the injured and dying the human evolutionary cycle slowed. As good as it is that medicine can now save lives (i mean ive had family in hospital) its the basic reason why we havent evolved significantly in the last cantury
------------------ Nor shadow or myst the jester is a myth he is absolute beware the jester http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...les/DRUIDD.gif |
We haven't evolved significantly in several centuries, and what I think is a bit odd is that everyone has being going straight for the proverbial jugular when talking about evolution, the humans.
Of course human evolution is harder, we've been staying too similar for ta long time. However, if you look to the rest of the animal kingdom, then evolution is shown more clearly. ------------------ Resident cantankerous sorcerer of the Clan HADB and Sorcerous Nuttella salesman of the O.R.T Long live HADB!!! http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/02/...sSite/2/47.jpg 'What doesn't kill me makes me stronger' |
Quote:
Once again, you're talking about the theory of natural selection here, not the whole man from monkey, everything from the sea, bg bang evolution stuff. |
Let me give some REAL reasons why evolutions dun exist
simple Yopu cannot SEE it can ? And if birds and reptiles and humans have the same styart Where are the missing links? Where are the creatures between reptiles and birds?, between reptiles and mammals? between mammals and birds? ------------------ http://www.phpshop.net/images/rikard/rikard2.gif Konfuzed, of Konfuzed and Zany, Bad Writerz Klub |
It is strange that the theory of evolution has only recently been accepted. When you think about how long we've been on this earth, it's odd that we know so little about it. Darwin's theory hasn't been proven to be true, there are exceptions and contradictions all over the place. Maruspial mice were found in Australia for the first time in 1975, for example. That simply defies logic. No single theory can ever really be a hundred percent sound, so evolution is still a huge mystery, like so many things on this earth. And to quote J. B. S. Haldane - "The universe is not only queerer than we imagine - it is queerer than we can imagine" http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...miles/wink.gif
------------------ Ciao! http://home-3.12move.nl/~se021070/sig3.gif [This message has been edited by Sorcerer Alex (edited 10-30-2001).] |
Acouple of scientists got together and actually disproved the theory of evolution by running some tests on remains thought to be "missing links" or close ancestors of ours which were actually just doctored so that a certain scientist could say that it was true ..... BUT the scientific community discounted their work because they didn't want to accept the truth .... one species cannot evolve into another ... it is scientifically impossible it has been proven just no-one brings it up any more .... just my 2 cents http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...es/biggrin.gif
------------------ http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...les/DRUIDD.gif You can only call someone something so many times before they become that which you did not wish them to be! Bad things happen to bad people! Founding Father of TLFB |
let's not forget that oooh loads of the earth is submerged. how much evidence, i wonder, i beneath the oceans?
the land masses have altered enormously over the aeons of history that we cannot really get to grips with and i still can't find things i dropped in my garden last year!!!! and they're not even buried. faith and god are non-starters really. if we can't explain evolution and the begining of 'matter/energy, then we certainly can't explain where the literal idea of 'god' came from. both ideas have the same basic stumbling block - the begining. personally, i prefer to go with a concept that has some hope of an answer at some point in the far distant future. but frankly, the idea that god came into being fully able to create is as daft an idea that i've ever encountered in all my born days......... ------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/hclark50/tracey5_10096.gif offended mistress of the illuminati |
Quote:
That's because we are human, with tiny little minds and huge egos and opinions of ourselves. How we can delude ourselves into thinking we should understand the slightest thing about any power as great as the creator must be is beyond me. The simple fact of the matter with the whole evolution bit is that science has become seriously flawed where it is concerned. There is no other hypothesis that would ever be so fully supported as true with such a lack of scientific evidence. If this was any other theory with so little proof and no repeatability then scientists everywhere would stomp on it and redicule it. They have to try to push this one forward though, even though it goes against every rule of scientific method, and the core tenants of their creed, because it is the only way they can justify their own self importance and place as the most brilliant in the universe. ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
can you prove I cannot prove it?
how can you prove I cannot prove it? therefore I can prove it therefore, evolution thoery is correct geez, Rikard |
Quote:
Besides Natural Selection is part of Evolution. Gorilla enters deresert and die due to over heating, Another gorilla has less hair and doen't die, gorilla kids don't need hair so are born with less and less of it, Volioa Evolution. Quote:
|
Well Rikard.
Your a atheist. Your not a Evoloutionist. What do you think our being came from? ------------------ http://www.asnsoup.com/RangerPatroit.gif So if in the forest look behind you, because that where the ranger is going to be Grand-Jester and Spam Monitor of Laughing Hyenas Messenger of the Emerald Dragon May a pregnant yak chew on your ear for all eternity. A guitar solo is to a guitarsist is what a palette is too a painter. "...But I look at my self as a fragile, inteligent,human being. But there is a clown inside that comes and messes it up everytime" -Jim Morrison GO DEVILS!!!! |
Quote:
------------------ Crustiest of the OLD COOTS Airline ticket to Afghanistan $800 High powered rifle with scope $1000 Hotel room with roof access $100 A clean Head shot on that sack of Horse Manure Usuma Bin Laden PRICELESS! |
Quote:
As far as your response to my post, there can be truth without proof, just not scientific truth. People who believe in creation are not putting forward a scientific theory, so the rules of scientific method do not apply. They can consider creation truth based on faith. The Scientific theory of evolution however, is put forward by scientists. The greater part of it is in fact not a theory at all, but a collection of hypothesis that they tacked onto the theory of natural selection/ evolution to try to get it accepted as true. As scientists, they cannot believe something they hypothesize about as true simply on belief, they need to have proof. So in that respect you are correct. As they have no proof, the all encompassing 'theory of evolution' is meerly a speculation. You are right about natural selection, although it is what I already said. The theory of natural selection is the ONLY true theory and proven part of the 'theory of evolution'. There is no proof for the 'big bang' or 'evolution from the sea' or any other part of what is today under the umbrella of evolution. Yes, natural selection is evolving, but today the word evolution has been convieniently used to describe many other things besides natural selection in an attempt, and a very successful one I might add, to confuse people into believing that it is all true, and thus give people a reason to disbelieve in God, and to satisfy a few scientists egos. *clears throat* Ahem. Sorry people. Didn't mean to slip into smart person mode on the forum, but sometimes ya just have to, you know? ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
IMO Evolution seems like a better reasonable choice than not when it comes to possibilities. Genetic similarity and difference is a matter of which genes are turned on or turned off in any particular species. The real thinking behind evolutution is trying to discern with a reasonable scientific method the course of events that led to a species being the species it is. I question any doubt cast towards it's validity as a scientific theory until a broad knowledge base of the activity that has been applied trying to prove and disprove it has been presented.
From what I know of it, the hypothesis it was born from has generally been reinforced by applying theory. ie. The evidence examined generally supports evolutuion's scientific validity as a theory. I really dont recall specifics but I know it involves studing everything from aercheology to gentics. I wouldnt reject it with out lots more info, but in the end it doesnt matter that much to me anyway. The main problem with the theory of evolution is that it contradicts other theories of the beginning of humanity and all other species on the earth. |
Quote:
You cann't say religion is truth because religion is FAITH and FAITH is (as sataed the the dictionary) strong belief without proof; religion; complete condfidence or trust; allegince to a person or cause. SO if you have faith in god it means you have belief in god which means you believe he exists even without proof. But is you take the second meaning without belief then you have no religion as faith is the back bone of any religion, it would be like me having condfidene that a chiar will not break when I sit on it, but I have not belief that the chair exist. |
Quote:
Oh and there is proof of something like a 'big bang' but not what caused it. Oh and please go on to expain what these things that have been 'tacked' on to evolution are as far I know your just making them up. |
Quote:
I have never once stated that all forms of life have continued unchanged. I am a firm believer of natural selection as I have said many times. How is it that you misunderstand this? The proof of a big bang is sketchy at best. It is entirely possible that a big bang did happen. As you say, you cannot prove what caused it. I have an extremely hard time even trying to consider that it happened at random and everything turned out so perfectly, especially ANY type of life. The things that have been tacked on are (and these are even listed on the thread you yourself gave me as not really being part of the original definition of evolution): 1. all life began in the sea and evolved to how it is today 2. The big bang, especially the idea that the big bang was totally random 3. Some say not only did all land life came from the sea, but that all life began with one microbial organism None of these three has any proof whatsoever that it is true. ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
Quote:
------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
all i want to add is thanks for your theories and arguments and personal insights although i got a little lost somewhere ... although i know this is Rikards thread http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif ...
------------------ Revived I Am to hunt this world... Banish ye evil or face my wrath... |
Quote:
As for 1.2&3 that proven stuff. Carbon and Uraiun dating and the sheer fact that sea life is discovered in the oldest levels of soil while anyform of land life is not in that level tells us that sea life came first. And if not a single ogamisn, what else? The orgainal theory of evolution has been altered so it fits with our current knowlage, just like the old theorys of the universe have been changed as we know that everything doesn't go aroung us. As for the big bang all spacal bodies can be traced back it there ever expanding course to a single point in space, is that just ramdom chance? Besides if the universe was one day to collapse upon itself it would proudce a graity well to shuch magnetiud that it could well fold time and expolde outward again as the big bang, but that just theory. Quote:
Quote:
[This message has been edited by Sir Real (edited 10-31-2001).] |
faith is nice - i suppose.......... !
however, faith is based more on a person's willingness to believe the words of someone else. take the bible, as that book is one i'm familiar with, it's stuffed with political intrigue and cultural 'norms' from start to end. women are unimportant for the most part (except where no man is available) son's are very important indeed - cultural difference, different time different culture. the explanations containd within the text attempt to explain where people came from - fair enough - hey, we all are interested in that, surely? evolution is also trying to explain and understand the same thing. personally, i think we need to look at the reasons why people choose to belong to a 'faith' of one sort or another. that would give huge insight into why people prefer the ethereal creator myth to a more concrete exploration of our begining. i still think that people steeped in faith and belief systems need to follow a moral code of some sort because to choose to accept the possiblity of there being no creator leaves them feeling that there are far too many decisions to be made. moral or otherwise. religion gives people a 'place' in the world without their having to make any effort to make their own. to say 'i'm a christian' or 'i'm a sikh' or 'i'm a jew' contains a huge amount of presumption about where that individual stands in the world and how they interact with it. of course, it's never entirely 100% accurate. i'm using it to make a point. i know many christians and jews who are the most enormous hypocrits! (jewish friends who love prawns and bacon and don't bother with the sabbath very often - naughty http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...iles/smile.gif) (christian friends who don't worry too much about adultery and telling lies etc.,) but the point is, they feel safer because of their faith. they wouldn't relinquish it even though most of the people i know personally who profess to have a 'faith' go against it very very often in pursuit of their own personal interests. ------------------ http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/hclark50/tracey5_10096.gif offended mistress of the illuminati |
Quote:
|
It doesnt matter whether its true or not. The point is that at this moment of time it is the most plausible explanation, therefore for most of our intents and purposes it is "true" to us. You could say that it is a coherent truth beacause it fits in with most of the evidence we have availible.
------------------ http://www.games-workshop.com/40kuni...Battleship.gif These Ships among the stars serve as the physical embodiment of the God-Emperor's will, punishing all who dare oppose the doctrines of Terra |
Natural selection is evolution to denny one is to denny the other.
As for 1.2&3 that proven stuff. Carbon and Uraiun dating and the sheer fact that sea life is discovered in the oldest levels of soil while anyform of land life is not in that level tells us that sea life came first. And if not a single ogamisn, what else? The orgainal theory of evolution has been altered so it fits with our current knowlage, just like the old theorys of the universe have been changed as we know that everything doesn't go aroung us. As for the big bang all spacal bodies can be traced back it there ever expanding course to a single point in space, is that just ramdom chance? Besides if the universe was one day to collapse upon itself it would proudce a graity well to shuch magnetiud that it could well fold time and expolde outward again as the big bang, but that just theory. Ummm, no. I can accept natural selection and not accept that all life came from the sea, or a microbe that randomly decided to live, or a big bang that randomly decided to happen. They are NOT proven things, they are only speculated at. We find less old organic matter on the land than in the sea? This tells us nothing, there is more sea, and more life in the sea, and things tend to be preserved more often in the sea. Doesn't prove a thing. A theory cannot just be altered. It must have concrete proof in order to do so, and so far this only fits our current guesses, nothing to do with actual knowledge. "would expand outward again as the big bang, but that is just theory." NO, that is not theory. That is hypothesis. There is a clear demarkationbetween what is a theory and what is a hypothesis, and many of the things that you and many others claim as theories in the modern view of evolution are not at this point. They get pushed off as such because natural selection IS a theory and they are tacked to it under the term evolution. ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
Quote:
it can be. If you are a christian you learn about the faith from other people and the bible, therefore you are putting faith in what they tell you. e.g When they tell you that you will go to heaven if you do what they say, you are putting faith in their promise. One reason why people like to belong to a faith is beacuse of the problems they have with accepting that their is no point to life. our genes exist to replicate themselves, but why, what is the point? beliving in a religion at least gives you an answer to this and the hope of eternal life. [This message has been edited by Dramnek_Ulk (edited 10-31-2001).] |
So as one thing is unproven you chose a even less proven theory to be true? That is not science, that being a sheep! if they are proven to current science standerds, just like the theorys of gravity, realitive and many others which the basies of teaching stand upon, would you disclaim these?
That a assumtion not all scientiest are tring to disprove god and you are doing just what you are having a go them for, It is pointless to contine this as you seem to stand on the basies that the bible is all truth while everything else is wrong and while you claim to be of a scietifict mind to is blantly overious that you are not because your mind is close anything different. In what way is creation less proven? It has been believed in from the beginning of written history, and that implies that it was believed in before. It was the standing belief, accepted universally, until very recently when evolution was postulated. As the standing belief, it cannot be disproven until evolution is proven. This is not being a sheep, this is simply a fact. If all of your areas of evolution are proven to current scientific standards, I will no longer argue against the 'theory'. I'll still believe in creation, but I will have no grounds to say that evolution is false either. I never said all scientists are trying to disprove God, just a select, very influential group. It does not matter whether you think the bible is all truth or not. The original scrolls with the original writings have been dated, and are among the earliest of written history. You can argue that all of mankind was mistaken for millenia as to how we came to be, and in that sense the writings are false, but that does not change the fact that creation has long been accepted as how we came to be. You cannot replace a millenias old belief with a 25 year old one meerly on speculation and think it has anything to do with it being more true. ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon [This message has been edited by Prime2U (edited 10-31-2001).] |
Quote:
[This message has been edited by Dramnek_Ulk (edited 10-31-2001).] |
Quote:
|
I posted something in this thread, and I've just now looked at it again, and finally there is one person who has the same opinion on the matter as me (Sir Real.) Plus, whoever it was who posted that I was just pointing out natural selection, no I wasn't and plus, natural selection is an aspect of evolution, when I said evolution you treated it as if evolution is something totally unrelated and that isn't true.
------------------ Resident cantankerous sorcerer of the Clan HADB and Sorcerous Nuttella salesman of the O.R.T Long live HADB!!! http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/02/...sSite/2/47.jpg 'What doesn't kill me makes me stronger' |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Talthyr Malkaviel:
I posted something in this thread, and I've just now looked at it again, and finally there is one person who has the same opinion on the matter as me (Sir Real.) Plus, whoever it was who posted that I was just pointing out natural selection, no I wasn't and plus, natural selection is an aspect of evolution, when I said evolution you treated it as if evolution is something totally unrelated and that isn't true. It's not totally unrelated, that isn't what I meant. It is indeed not only an aspect of evolution, but it's the only thing encompassed in the original definition of evolution. These other things that were added later, they are what I have issue with. Today, when people say evolution, they don't mean only natural selection anymore. So to make things clear in explanations, they have to be separated from each other, 'evolution' consisting of natural selection, the big bang, life from the sea, etc, and natural selection on it's own. The way that natural selection is inrelated to the rest of the evolutionary perspective is that it is the only part that is proven. None of the rest of it is. What you talked about in your post was humans not evolving much in recent years, and that evolution was shown more clearly in animals. I'm sorry if you disagree, but this IS natural selection in action. You can look at animals through generations and see this. You cannot see where the animal came from an amoeba from the see. You cannot look at animals and see the big bang randomly happening. So yes, you were only pointing out natural selection in that post. [This message has been edited by Prime2U (edited 10-31-2001).] |
Quote:
AND THE BIG BANG DIDN@T DESIDE ANYTHNIG IT NOT A LIVE!!!! SO A THEORY CAN BE ALTER BUT THINGS CAN BE TACKED ON??? THAT ALTERING IT, COME BACK AND PLEASE MAKE SENSE! |
Quote:
AND IT NOT UNIVERSAL, GET ME AN ALIEN AND LETS SEE WHAT HE BELIEVES! OKAY SOME TIME DIACTIS HOW THINGS WORK THEM FINE, PAINS IN THE BODY, DESISE, ETC ARE CAUSED BY DEMONS AS THAT BELIEF LASTED LONG THE SO CALLED MEDIEN. |
WE FIND THE SEA LIFE ON LAND WERE THE WAS ONCE SEA, AH HELL GO READ SOMETHING ABOUT THE FREAKING THING THEY TRY TO GIVE A GOOD ARUGMENT!!! AND THE BIG BANG DIDN@T DESIDE ANYTHNIG IT NOT A LIVE!!!! SO A THEORY CAN BE ALTER BUT THINGS CAN BE TACKED ON??? THAT ALTERING IT, COME BACK AND PLEASE MAKE SENSE! You find sea life on land where there was once sea? That's very nice, I'd be pretty surprised if you didn't find the remains of sea life in a place where the sea once was. It doesn't have anything at all to do with our debate or evolution though. My arguments are completely sound, the understanding of them may be limited, but that's no fault of mine. Things can be tacked on AFTER they have enough proof to be considered theory. At this point natural selection is the only one qualified to be called a theory. I'll say this as clearly as possible. Evolution, defined as descent with modification, does happen. How does it happen? Through natural selection. This is the only true theory so far. All of the other things such as all life from the sea, or all life from a microbe, or a random big bang, are meer speculation and can only be called hypothetical at best. You have not given me any proof to prove any of these, all you have given me are increasingly angry opinions read from biased middle school textbooks. That's ok though, as I don't really expect you to give me any concrete proof, as none exists. [This message has been edited by Prime2U (edited 11-01-2001).] |
Quote:
1) Do not respond in all caps. This is called SHOUTING, and it's considered extremely rude. 2) Please keep your remarks impersonal. Attack the idea, not the person. Telling someone to "come back and please make sense" is rather demeaning. I realize you are new here, but please do show courtesy to our other members. Ironworks is basically a friendly place, and we all must do what we can to keep it that way. Thanks, ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/saz1.gif Welcome to Ironworks...over 4100 happy members and one old buzzard! |
Quote:
Belief is not proof, I never said creation was MORE proven, I simply said it is not LESS proven. And it does have far more credibility at this point. Believe lends credibility to something. If you have a solid theory with plenty of evidence but no one believes it then it's pretty worthless, for example. In our case we have two unproven things, one of which has millenias of common belief and one of which has 25 years of belief by part of the population. Obviously creation has far more credibility as a belief. No if you can prove that your version of evolution is true, then it can replace a much older, more credible belief. Then it can become the common belief. Until then, you saying creation is false is only an opinion with no facts whatsoever to back it up. ------------------ http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/prime.gif "Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved