thoughts on evolution

pixeewinged · Jan 26, 2009

a

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

SunLion said:

Oh - I missed this post;
Its as proven as anything can possibly be, as any BRAINWASHED person will tell you.
Honestly, turn off the TV, and go do some reading for yourself; Look at the facts, look at the arguments on the interpretation on the facts and then tell me the statement you gave above.

Gosh, what a convincing paper you've written. Submit the above words to a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and I'm sure you'll become famous like Einstein and Dawkins [rolls eyes].

Funny how creationists demand evidence, proof, logic, reason- while categorically rejecting all scientific measurements, observations, and even the validity of logic and reason itself. That's why I make no serious effort to educate these people- you can't reason with someone who holds that reason itself is invalid.
Click to expand...

I love you, too.

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

pixeewinged said:

lol - all my love back to you
Click to expand...

Reciprocation is simply divine.

Dance with me?

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

jmt said:

yes still feel superior, and were humans not animals but if you feel that your family evoluted form mice or monkeys feelfree
Click to expand...

I am perplexed by your response, what does "evoluted" mean? The belief that we are "better" than animals is not only arrogant, but a flawed assumption indeed. You must think alot of yourself, seeing as you are a superior form of life. I bow down to you and am humbled by your wisdom.

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

jmt said:

what book is this from?
Click to expand...

It's from the book of "Mind of a Man of Science and Reason."

You should add it to your "to burn" list.

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

truth-giver said:

Oh - I missed this post;

Its as proven as anything can possibly be, as any BRAINWASHED person will tell you.

Honestly, turn off the TV, and go do some reading for yourself; Look at the facts, look at the arguments on the interpretation on the facts and then tell me the statement you gave above.
Click to expand...

So I take it that anyone who doesn't see things exactly the same as you is "brainwashed?" You're a christian, alright. An open minded, non-judgmental christian. Keep up the good work. I think it's time the rest of us concede and admit that we made the whole evil-oution thing up. It's not like anyone has ever invented a religion, because as we all know, there is only one true religion; yours.

lithium · Jan 26, 2009

TheLizardKingMike said:

I think it's time the rest of us concede and admit that we made the whole evil-oution thing up.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself, I'm actually satan in disguise, sent here to tempt you all with my verifiable facts and my robust empirical methodology...

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 26, 2009

lithium said:

Speak for yourself, I'm actually satan in disguise, sent here to tempt you all with my verifiable facts and my robust empirical methodology...
Click to expand...

.

jmt · Jan 26, 2009

y evolution is fake
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HrSN7176XI

pixeewinged · Jan 26, 2009

a

jmt · Jan 26, 2009

pixeewinged said:

lol, oh no jmt, you have found evolutions Kryptonite, only the presence of an all powerful, all knowing, all present being could bestow upon mankind the perfection that is Rick Astley.
Click to expand...

you got rick roll'd

pixeewinged · Jan 27, 2009

a

truth-giver · Jan 27, 2009

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mf8JdmMOio&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=wilder&emb=0

jmt · Jan 27, 2009

truth-giver said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mf8JdmMOio&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=wilder&emb=0
Click to expand...

dude 55mins long! whats he going to point out?

update saw 3min of it and im lost

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 27, 2009

pixeewinged said:

Hey truth giver, since you love video's so much, here are some for you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=istxUVBZD2s&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEZTdOlGss&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFeVwuJB7I&feature=related

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09hOebw9KW4&feature=related

there are about 30 video's in this series, I have given you the first five, but I suggest you watch them all, it will save us a lot of time and answer pretty much any questions you might have.

And if anyone else out there wants to watch, this thunderfoot guy is actually pretty funny, he reminds me of a professor I once had. anyway... enjoy!
Click to expand...

Why waste your time? You KNOW he isn't even going to watch them.

Fawkes · Jan 28, 2009

pixeewinged said:

ok I will bite... what the hell are you talking about?

For all you pro-evolutionists:
Where are the millions of supposed missing links? So far they are entirely missing!

I assume you are talking about the missing link between man and ape....
for starters, there are a plethera of hominid skulls... and when you line em up, you can see the gradual enlargement of the brain cavity, and definition of humanoid features (not to mention the skeletal remains that indicate upright locomotion) - I would suppose that this evidence was planted by satan though.. so I will also point out that we probably wont find one single form of difinitive evidence of the transition from ape to man, for one thing, evolution doesnt happen over night... or even in one or two generations - it happens gradually over many, so the likelyhood of finding one skull, or set of bones, or whatever that would satisfy your skepticism is unlikely.
Secondly, I'd also like to mention the fact that along with our collection of skulls and skeletal remains, we have found many tools, which show a gradual advancement of technological complexity which coincide roughly with the ages of the remains.

Of course you have to believe in carbon dating to believe in that sort of thing I guess. but I digress... back to your list of questions

Where are there any examples anywhere of new genetic information ever being added for the positive of the creature? All mutations show degeneration of creatures, and they certainly can't breed successfully afterward...
Hmm... I am not sure what point you are trying to make here, because new genetic information benefits creatures all the time. from the smallest algae to the largest whale. Its called sex, you add new genetic material to your genetic material, and you get the next generation - though I will leave it up to you if you consider offspring a benefit.
I think what you might be trying to say is that genetic mutations are always detrimental - again, what a silly concept... I could think of a million mutations that are beneficial, but, Sickle Cell Anemia in humans comes to mind.. Sickle Cell Anemia can be detrimental to ones health, I wont argue that point, but... the funny thing about sickle cell is that it helps prevent malaria. And lo and behold, this genetic disorder is most prelevent among people who live in regions where malaria is a common threat. Which is why it is more common in african americans - especially those who have genetic ties back to the malaria belt in Africa.
So though sickle cell anemia can cause blood clots and pain... I guess from an evolutionary point of view I would ask which is better? a little pain, a slight chance at a blood clot that might be fatal.... or assured death by malaria? at least with sickle cell you stand a chance of making it to maturity and reproducing. No one ever said evolution was perfect.. but it seems to work.

Why has thousands of years of breeding horses, only ever produced horses? pigs producing pigs, cows cows, etc?...
Well for starters, on an evolutionary scale a few thousand years is nothing... barely a blip. It takes a long time for gradual enhancements to the genetic code to produce a new animal. So it would be silly to expect a horse to give birth to a whole new creature... but, I would argue that over a few thousand years of breeding, the horse, cow, and pig have all become very different from thier wild counterparts... a tennessee walking horse bares virtually no resemblence to nor behavior of a wild horse- no doubt if given enough time, they and thier wild counterparts would likely take seperate evolutionary paths.
The thing about the idea of evolution and natural selection is this... if a trait works, the trait gets passed along, if it doesnt, it is much less likely to be passed on, and thus shows up rarely in the gene pool. Its really not a hard concept..

The horse is fed, housed, and bred by humans... mostly to suit our needs, the horse doesnt really need much of a strategy to reach adulthood and reproduce because we humans supply everything it needs in our self created niche.
This effects the horse evolutionarily in many ways.. for one thing, the horse is bred for whatever traits we desire... not necessarily those that suit it. We can breed horses with long graceful necks and legs, and flowing manes - and often do... these things would likely hinder a horse in a natural setting. If left to its own devices, the horse would likely never produce such pointless traits. In essence we hinder the horses natural evolution by selection by conciously breeding for certain traits we desire. Life is really just one big competition for recources and sex. When you have what you need, there isnt much to shape your strategy, so there is little change, but, when you have to fight for a mate, or a home, or for food, there are advantages to having an edge.. thus we get mutations... some work and benefit the creature in getting recources or sex... and some dont.. the ones that give a creature an edge make it into the next generation, get passed along, and eventually may become commonplace within the species. I could go on, but Id like to get to your next question.

Why does recorded history not go back beyond 4,000 B.C.?...
Im gonna keep this one short and sweet... there are many likely reasons... from the fact that much of that history was probably oral to the fact that early christians had an affinity for burning ancient libraries and centers of knowlege in the name of god.

Why is the population only in the Mid Billions and not hundred of Billions? because we havent cured death yet.

Why is carbon dating and other radioactive dating so inherently faulty?
I wasnt aware that it was... sure, it doesnt give an exact date.. but, when your in the neighborhood of a few thousand years on a scale of millions, your really just splitting hairs.

If I have a closed box on a shelf, how long do I have to wait for it to have a little bang in there and a universe created?
till jesus comes

I am not going to write much more as this is long enough for now... but, you should really try to educate yourself better on what evolution and natural selection are, how they work, and what drives it all.. because you seem to be either misinformed, or to lack understanding.
Click to expand...

She shoots . . .SHE SCORES!!!! GOAL!!!!
(Sorry, I guess you are a female.)
Nice one, Pixie

I have seen a lot that proves evolution. I am going to go ahead and agree with Darwin. When you see how he described the finches in the Galapagos and how their beaks had adapted to feed on their own particular island it is hard to refute evolution. I don't remember now, Biology was a long time ago, but lets say a nut grew only on one island, and this nut had a hard shell. The birdies on that island had evolved strong stoat beaks. Another island might be very rocky and little seeds might fall into cracks. Those birds had evolved long narrow beaks. Etc.

As for the recorded history only going back 6000 years, well, maybe that is just when man started taking notes. They have evidence that the aborigines in Australia arrived 40K or 50K years ago from Indonesia or Papua New Guinea.

pixeewinged · Jan 28, 2009

a

jmt · Jan 28, 2009

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri3qObxRPk8

jmt · Jan 28, 2009

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIb4qM14gkk

lets get it on!

TheLizardKingMike · Jan 28, 2009

pixeewinged said:

alright, I am watching this wilder-smith video, and one of the first things I am wondering about it is why this guy isnt presenting evidence for anything... just a bunch of pointless anecdotes - half of which poorly carry his point.

I am having a hard time following his point... but, one I did hear him make is that the whole point of intelligent design is Jesus... but, I thought you creationist people like to argue that your "scientific" evidence points to a designer, and that it should be taught in schools on its scientific merits... and yet, here you are admitting that your whole argument has an alterior motive, one that has absolutely nothing to do with the furtherence of knowledge.

So you admit your whole "scientific" argument has nothing to do with science.. that it isnt even based in the principals of the scientific method. That it is nothing more than a way that allows the christian religion to try to bully itself into schools and into national debate.

You see what you simple minded dunder heads dont seem to understand is that even if your dense little theory were able to withstand even the simplest of scientific inquiry- the evidence would only point to a creator - not your creator... and believe me there are plenty of creation myths around the world. So how is it that you come to your conclusions that your god did it... does the evidence point to this somehow? and if so - how? - lots of cultural myths talk of floods - so even if there was substantial evidence of a global flood (which there isnt) how can you be sure it is the flood of the bible to which the evidence points? couldnt it just as easily point to the inuits creator, or the gods of the aborigine people, or why not the flying spaghetti monster of the pastafarians?

- I would argue that if you were seeking to prove creationism scientifically then you would have to explore all avenues presented by your evidence.... if there are other tales of global floods, you havent done your due dilligence unless you have went through one by one and eliminated them based on your evidence - it would certainly be the scientific thing to do. If your interests were in the furtherence of scientific inquiry and mans collective knowlege (which is the only motive of science) then you should follow the evidence where it takes you... am I wrong?

No, Im not... you people try to come off as if your argument is as valid as Darwins, as if because darwins theory wasnt perfect, it proves that yours might be viable too. But darwin didnt board the beagle in order to prove that his own assumptions were right, he went in order to observe, compare, study, sample, examine, and test to see what he could find out. The conclusions he ultimately came to werent exactly what he had expected to see, and there were suprises along the way. And in perfect scientific fashion, he laid his own suspicians aside and went where the evidence pointed.

Your argument is based on a fairytale, supported by marshmellow evidence...and you go flouncing round the scientific arena waving it in everyones face, insistent someone take you seriously.. and some do, but, when they point out your inconsistencies, or your lack of understanding of a particular topic, you cry foul - and act as if you werent given a fair shake. Well tough shit - get better evidence.

You people need to plug into reality for a minute and realize that science has sent objects to the farthest reaches of our solar system and beyond, it has allowed men to play golf on the moon, it has taken us deeper below the surface of the ocean than any man has ever been, science has allowed us to expand the average human lifespan by thrice or better. It has given us the power of flight, the wonder of instant worldwide communication, and has harnessed the awesome power of an atom. Science has enhanced your life is so many ways.. you probably couldnt count the convieniences science has given you on any given day - they are just too numerous. It has done a lot for you ungrateful smear artists. Odds are you owe your life to it.

Evolution is only the scientific method applied to the question of our origins.. it is not a doctrine, or a dogma... but an answer based on deductive reasoning, experimentation, and observation. When you call evolution rubbish, you are calling the scientific method rubbish.. and if the scientific method is rubbish, then burn your computer - if you can find fire - dont use rubbish technology like a match... while you are at it, why dont you set your house on fire too.. you dont need all of that architectual nonsense... I mean really what good god fearing creationist needs that gas, electrical, and plumbing rubbish right? sanitation smanitation... If god wanted you to have all of the comforts of the modern age, he would have created them for you right?

I tell you, you people are some of the best bullshit artists in the history of bullshit. No amount of stamping your foot is going to do it this time though... you sick bastards had your fun pouring molten lead on people, and burning them at the stake in the name of your deranged diety. I know I for one am not going to stand idle while you attempt to drag science through the mud and take us back to the dark ages. You people need to put your money where your mouth is and go live like the amish - but hell even the amish give thier children a choice.

Why dont you people just admit it... when it boils down to it, it doesnt matter what the evidence shows... whether it shows evolution to be right, creationism to be right, or that all of this is nothing more than a computer matrix - you would still be pounding your fists on the table insisting that you are right. Your whole argument is really based on faith and nothing more. You cant prove your god created all of this any more than you can prove the flying spaghetti monster didnt - and that is where science has the edge, we can establish a basis for our beliefs, we can show a working understanding of the processes at work, we can make assumptions based on the mountains of evidence - and working with such assumptions, we can hurl objects into space, transplant organs, split the atom, and clone sheep. No god required - Pretty strong results for a "flawed" persuit.

eh, you are right King Mike - why do I even bother... if these people had any intellectual curiosity, they wouldnt need to be told over and over again the holes in thier crackpot theories.

The only thing I have left to say about that video is that he quoted Carl Sagan in his talk... and even though Im not positive where he pulled the quote from, I can tell you with about 98% certainty that he completely misrepresented whatever point Carl was trying to make.
Click to expand...

What I like is that whenever you post a valid argument, the creationists either just post more videos that have no evidence to support their claims, or say nothing at all. I wonder why that is, I really do. Keep it up, Pixee.

Log in or Sign up

thoughts on evolution

pixeewinged Visitor

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

lithium frogboy

TheLizardKingMike Members

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

pixeewinged Visitor

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

pixeewinged Visitor

truth-giver Member

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

TheLizardKingMike Members

Fawkes Member

pixeewinged Visitor

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

TheLizardKingMike Members

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

thoughts on evolution

pixeewinged Visitor

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

TheLizardKingMike Members

lithium frogboy

TheLizardKingMike Members

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

pixeewinged Visitor

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

pixeewinged Visitor

truth-giver Member

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

TheLizardKingMike Members

Fawkes Member

pixeewinged Visitor

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

jmt Ezekiel 25:17

TheLizardKingMike Members

Share This Page

Useful Searches