Go Back   Home > SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums > Sci-Fi Nation > Pilot's Mess [chit-chat zone]

Welcome to the SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums.

You are currently viewing our community boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free and open-minded sci-fi community you will be able to start and reply to forum discussions, write movie reviews, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or with your account please contact support here.

Pilot's Mess [chit-chat zone]

This is the forum to get to know your fellow pilots and the ONLY place to talk about everything else not really relevant to sci-fi movies, including your personal loves and interests. A true pilot doesn't discuss these issues while on duty.

View Poll Results: What are you? (Insert joke here)
Buddhist 1 2.94%
Hindu 0 0%
(Christian) Roman Catholic 2 5.88%
(Christian) Presbyterian 0 0%
(Christian) Variation 5 14.71%
Jewish 1 2.94%
Muslim 0 0%
Athiest (Militant) 4 11.76%
Athiest (Live and let live) 12 35.29%
Other (RELIGIONS YOU HAVE NAMED AFTER YOURSELF DON'T COUNT!) 9 26.47%
Voters: 34. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 23, 2003, 12:15 PM   #106
HighWiredSith
More Than Just Okay
HighWiredSith's Avatar
3,854 flights since Jul 2001
Location: The Uplift Mojo Party
Re: Caution! Religion!

Your examples are those of adaptation, not species mutation. A virus that infects dogs adapting to survive in humans does not represent a DNA/species mutation. The same applies to Darwin's finches and a thousand other examples of plants and animals changing charactersitics to better survive in a hostile environment. Evolutionists are contantly using these clear and valid examples of species adaptation as some kind of proof for mutation in order to avoid their failure to prove the major premise: where have we ever witnessed or found evidence of any species changing into another species, let alone becoming more complex? The fact is, there are none nor are there fossils that show a mutation gradually over time. These were called missing links in Darwin's day. Today those links are curiously still missing.

As far as the earth being billions of years old, I can show evidence to refute that as well. One example is the erosion rate of the continents. At the rate that land masses currently erode due to the constant influx of ocean waves and tides, every inch of land on this planet would have eroded away over 800 million years ago, if the earth were 2.6 billion years old. Time is an abstract, a jade's trick that the evolutionist throws at nagging problems (like the one above) to dismiss the lack of real, scientific proof. It happened gradually over millions and millions of years, so gradual that we cannot see it happening or find evidence to prove that it did, convenient...

Last edited by HighWiredSith : May 23, 2003 at 02:25 PM.
HighWiredSith is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 01:01 AM   #107
Ivan
formerly known as Ivanhoe
Ivan's Avatar
1,574 flights since Nov 2000
Location: Europe - Balkans
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Posted By Autechre

my parents had a choice if they wanted to make a new life or not and you can choose when you want to die - which i belive is the only true important question.

I don’t think there is true free choice to any decision you may make, including giving birth or death. This is my whole point. This occurred to me while I was thinking about Dark City. * You can look up the thread titled “Are we what we are because of what we remember”.

If I was to reply sincerely, there is nothing I have ever wanted , thought or done that wasn’t somehow connected to what I have seen, heard or done before. This includes the physical (biological capacity ) and sociological effects of the environment.

All your wishes, motives and desires are direct consequence of processed information from your surroundings, received through our senses. In conjunction to the primal instinct of self preservation it brings you to decisions like “having a child” or ending your life.

For example , you can ask your parents why did they have you? Probably the first answer is that they wanted a child. But if you ask them why they will probably answer that it is a normal thing to do and that it brings a unique experience and sensation to ones life.

Now the important question is why did they think it was normal? It is different from individual to individual but the most common answers you will get is that it is because it is globally done. It is the preservation of the species . It is conforming and identification with the masses. A motivation linked to acceptance of the surroundings in order to enable easier survival of the individual.

On the other hand a fewer number of parents will develop their own justifications for giving birth but all don’t vary from the idea of self preservation, because all parents in one way or another think they will eventually benefit from the fact of having a child.

By saying this I mean both/either the material benefit and sociological ( or psychological) benefit. I see multiple scenarios and it is hard to list them all , even impossible but I believe that the principle is the same. In some case abstractions can be even that extreme that an individual has put the possibility of having a child and his welfare beyond his own need for preservation but then again this is solely because that individual has developed a belief that this belief is important to be enforced by HIM or HER. They’ve built a system where it is GOOD for them not to do GOOD for themselves. Again out of religious or moral sensations an obligations adopted from the social surroundings. Then again the self preservation motive is the same and clear .

Death is somewhat similar, even your decision to die or commit suicide is linked to our self-preservation instinct , as contradictory as it may sound, all suicides were carried out with distinct idea that those suicidal individuals will in some way or another benefit from what they think is “death”.

This can be because their psyche has developed a belief that life , as perceived by the senses is not the ultimate and the only form of existence. Or they think that their current state of existence is not worthy enough for them to continue experiencing it. All these motives are explicitly egocentric self-preservation instinct , I believe present in all life, making it eventually a complex but eventually predictable component of the system we call universe.
Ivan is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 01:12 AM   #108
JACKER
The Paradisal Man
JACKER's Avatar
1,359 flights since Dec 2001
Location: Either in the gutter or the clouds
Re: Caution! Religion!

My parent's were both horny.
JACKER is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 01:30 AM   #109
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
Evolutionists are contantly using these clear and valid examples of species adaptation as some kind of proof for mutation in order to avoid their failure to prove the major premise: where have we ever witnessed or found evidence of any species changing into another species, let alone becoming more complex?

Um, the two examples I have been giving you. The Corona virus and Darwin's finches have changed. Darwin's finches especially because when the first birds flew to the island, there was only one species. They evolved to become many. These species, as I said above, ARE NOT FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. They have evolved from the original bird to many species of birds.

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
A virus that infects dogs adapting to survive in humans does not represent a DNA/species mutation. The same applies to Darwin's finches and a thousand other examples of plants and animals changing charactersitics to better survive in a hostile environment.

OK, so a virus is only made up of a protein casing to hold it together and DNA (or RNA) inside it. That is all. Don't give me the crap about how I have never seen a virus, and how can I trust those people that this is true. Science doesn't need to lie. Religion does need to lie to get money and power and to get millions of mindless drones following the church. Anyways, the virus only really has its DNA as its "brain". This DNA, since it controls everything the virus does, HAS mutated and evolved to be able to infect humans. It has evolved. So have the finches. See above. These examples are true and real. They prove evolution. Wake up. I do not care whether you believe ina god or not. There are answers that a god can give that science can only give an equally weak theory (creation of universe, etc.), but they are still both theories. But evolution DOES exist, I cannot stress this enough. You will NEVER be able to disprove it. I am completely sincere when I say that only the ignorant shun the idea of evolution after it has been proven in this day and age. But it is new. Give it time, more and more followers will come to it. I should think the intellectuals will be the first to go, but HWS, you have actually dumbfounded me. I was a little shocked when I found out that you actually do not believe in evolution.
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 01:47 AM   #110
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
Evolutionists are contantly using these clear and valid examples of species adaptation as some kind of proof for mutation in order to avoid their failure to prove the major premise: where have we ever witnessed or found evidence of any species changing into another species, let alone becoming more complex? The fact is, there are none nor are there fossils that show a mutation gradually over time. These were called missing links in Darwin's day. Today those links are curiously still missing.

OK, well, why exactly do you strictly follow what scientists classify as a species? If you discard so much other information science has generated, why follow taxonomy? Why should a scientist decide what is a new species and what is still part of that same species? Well, I agree that we shouldn't. Really taxonomy is only used for biologists and to standarize the name of organisms with long complicated latin names that only biologists could memorize. If you are going by that definition of what a species is or isn't, then that's a little wierd. We as normal people and not biologists, see organisms differently. We now understand that the Corona virus infects people, and that makes it a changed thing now. This means, to me, that it has evolved into a new species. There is no denying that it has evolved. It's just the aspect of the classification of a spcies I am talking about.

As for your other point that I quoted here, fossils have changed. Not all fossils are the same are they? We actaully have seen oganisms evolve through fossils, but previously it was not enough to prove evolution. Now, since we know evolution is a reality, we can safely assume, that the organisms of the fossils DID evolve. And I really wasn't aware that there was any missing link other than the one between humans and primates....
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 08:59 AM   #111
Bayleaf48
Hero Of Time
Bayleaf48's Avatar
1,316 flights since Jun 2001
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon, England
Smile Re: Caution! Religion!

As far as I'm aware there's isn't another than that one either pinky

But as far as religion goes, is there any proof that there is a God, heaven & hell?
Bayleaf48 is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 02:57 PM   #112
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Post Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by Bayleaf48
But as far as religion goes, is there any proof that there is a God, heaven & hell?

No, there is no proof of any of them. Not to say that there is proof that the big bang theory is true as well as many other scientific theories. Many things science can only provide theories for, but religion is just one big theory. NONE of it can be proven, whereas many things discovered by science can. Our technology is advancing at such a rate that we are just now beginning to understand and proove many things of the world and space through science. 50 years ago we new practicaly nothing compared to what we do today. Religion offers a simple answer to everything: god put it there. This may be true, and I must say this because I cannot prove otherwise right now. But for the things that science has proven, it seems much more likely than the answers religion has to offer.
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 03:02 PM   #113
Bayleaf48
Hero Of Time
Bayleaf48's Avatar
1,316 flights since Jun 2001
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon, England
Smile Re: Caution! Religion!

True as religion has NEVER helped me out & so I've turned away from it for good
Bayleaf48 is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2003, 03:19 PM   #114
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Smile Re: Caution! Religion!

Nice to know. I really dislike religion (as you may already know ) as well as the church. I especially hate it when we have services at school. Can any religious people that attend church please tell me how reading from a book mindlessly shows that we are worshiping a god? The father or whatever you want to call him just says "Now turn to page xyz, and continue to read." Everyone just reads the lines where it nicely says where you have to read, and I doubt anyone thinks about it. Besides, how can you believe in what a few people wrote in a book so many years ago? Why are they so special so that they get to tell you what to believe in? Seems very messed up to me. If you do believe in a god, I really hope that you at least not follow what the church says for you to believe in. Whats the point? It just turns you into another follower and yet another contributer to the church's wealth, which does NOT need to be any greater. The church owns, like what, 1/3 of Europe? More? I just don't understand why you must follow exactly what someone else says for you to follow, because isn't religion about your own personal worship and enlightenment? Why do you have to speak to god through a preist who is supposedly better than you because he can talk to god and you can't? Just doesn'y mae sense to me...
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 06:08 PM   #115
HighWiredSith
More Than Just Okay
HighWiredSith's Avatar
3,854 flights since Jul 2001
Location: The Uplift Mojo Party
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by pinky


Um, the two examples I have been giving you. The Corona virus and Darwin's finches have changed. Darwin's finches especially because when the first birds flew to the island, there was only one species. They evolved to become many. These species, as I said above, ARE NOT FOUND ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. They have evolved from the original bird to many species of birds.


You are clearly melding two entirely different actions, taking the results of action a) species adaptation, and using those results to somehow prove action b) species mutation. Your examples do not in any stretch of the imagination represent one species becoming another species. Finches with small beaks and finches with large beaks are still finches. And the fact that multiple species of animals exist only in one place proves absolutely nothing. If evolution occured there then answer two questions. A) why is not happening today. B) where is the proof outside of simple, observable leaps in logic (fossils would be a good start).



Quote:
OK, so a virus is only made up of a protein casing to hold it together and DNA (or RNA) inside it. That is all. Don't give me the crap about how I have never seen a virus, and how can I trust those people that this is true. Science doesn't need to lie. Religion does need to lie to get money and power and to get millions of mindless drones following the church. Anyways, the virus only really has its DNA as its "brain". This DNA, since it controls everything the virus does, HAS mutated and evolved to be able to infect humans. It has evolved. So have the finches. See above. These examples are true and real. They prove evolution. Wake up. I do not care whether you believe ina god or not. There are answers that a god can give that science can only give an equally weak theory (creation of universe, etc.), but they are still both theories. But evolution DOES exist, I cannot stress this enough. You will NEVER be able to disprove it. I am completely sincere when I say that only the ignorant shun the idea of evolution after it has been proven in this day and age. But it is new. Give it time, more and more followers will come to it. I should think the intellectuals will be the first to go, but HWS, you have actually dumbfounded me. I was a little shocked when I found out that you actually do not believe in evolution.

Your arguments fall apart in simple assumptions and grandiose, dramatic statments of opinon don't become fact because you write words in all caps! Again, I hardly dispute that your examples exist, I argue that they prove your premise. You have yet to prove that they do. You think I am ignorant, how is that relevant? Do you expect me to throw up my hands, get disgusted or frustrated and give up because you spout a bunch of cliche'd nonsense? I say this because I think you are generally interesting in improving your ability to debate and these are amateur pitfalls. Avoid them if you wish to remain credible.
HighWiredSith is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 06:30 PM   #116
JACKER
The Paradisal Man
JACKER's Avatar
1,359 flights since Dec 2001
Location: Either in the gutter or the clouds
Re: Caution! Religion!

Can't evolution and God or religon be considered apart of the same thing?


Last edited by JACKER : May 25, 2003 at 06:37 PM.
JACKER is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 07:31 PM   #117
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by JACKER
Can't evolution and God or religon be considered apart of the same thing?


Yes, they absolutely can. A god can create the universe and Earth and possibly even create the first organisms. Then they can evolve. The mere fact that organisms have evolved leads me to say that if anybody were religious, I would hope that they would believe in this, because otherwise they would be shuning an idea that has been proven by nature.
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 09:00 PM   #118
HighWiredSith
More Than Just Okay
HighWiredSith's Avatar
3,854 flights since Jul 2001
Location: The Uplift Mojo Party
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by pinky


OK, well, why exactly do you strictly follow what scientists classify as a species? If you discard so much other information science has generated, why follow taxonomy? Why should a scientist decide what is a new species and what is still part of that same species? Well, I agree that we shouldn't. Really taxonomy is only used for biologists and to standarize the name of organisms with long complicated latin names that only biologists could memorize. If you are going by that definition of what a species is or isn't, then that's a little wierd. We as normal people and not biologists, see organisms differently. We now understand that the Corona virus infects people, and that makes it a changed thing now. This means, to me, that it has evolved into a new species. There is no denying that it has evolved. It's just the aspect of the classification of a spcies I am talking about.

As for your other point that I quoted here, fossils have changed. Not all fossils are the same are they? We actaully have seen oganisms evolve through fossils, but previously it was not enough to prove evolution. Now, since we know evolution is a reality, we can safely assume, that the organisms of the fossils DID evolve. And I really wasn't aware that there was any missing link other than the one between humans and primates....

This is where you show your own ignorance. In reality, there are only a miniscule amount of fossils that are believed by evolutionists to represent the progression of one genetically similar species into a completely and genetically different species. Off the top of my head I can think of about three disputed sets of fossils.. This represents about .001% of all known fossils. Yet even these three are highly in disupte among just the evolutionist scientist as to their origin and age. The fossil set found in Montana in the mid 1980's that was presented by geologists to be the trump card, the smoking gun to finally prove the evolution of one species into the another turned out, after DNA testing, to be the jawbone of a not-so-ancient pig.

I've already defined the only taxinomic term we are using - species and, unless you wish to disupte it, I see no reason to debate terms. You virus example is again, species adaptation. It is no different from a Collie having a litter of half Collie, half German Shepard offspring, or short necked giraffes dying off in favor of those with long necks able to forrage for food and survive. I do not argue survival of the fittest yet the original question goes unanswered and you have yet to present one single piece of evidence to show us where one specific species became another specific and different species.

I will bottom line it for you. Change does not equal evolution. Your entire line of argument is based on this simplified premise, i.e. we can observe change in nature therefore evolution is valid. I have proven through simple logic that your premise is invalid and have given you multiple opportunities to bring evidence to the contrary. As a fellow debater, let me assure there are better arguments than these. Dont' rely on simplified generalizations to make specific points. Specific questions require specific answers and specific pieces of evidence to back them up. You are the affirmative, you support the resolution: Evolution is a valid theory and the best explanation for where we came from. The burden of proof is on you. As the negative, all I need do is disprove your premise which I have clearly done.

Last edited by HighWiredSith : May 25, 2003 at 09:05 PM.
HighWiredSith is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 09:06 PM   #119
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith

You are clearly melding two entirely different actions, taking the results of action a) species adaptation, and using those results to somehow prove action b) species mutation. [/b]

Species mutate to adapt. Species adaption and mutation are different, but directly related. The finches have mutated, and by doing so, they adapt. That is what I have been saying.

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
Your examples do not in any stretch of the imagination represent one species becoming another species. Finches with small beaks and finches with large beaks are still finches. And the fact that multiple species of animals exist only in one place proves absolutely nothing. If evolution occured there then answer two questions. A) why is not happening today. B) where is the proof outside of simple, observable leaps in logic (fossils would be a good start).[/b]

Yes, finches with different sized beaks are still in the finch genus, but they evolved to different species of finches. Besides, it was not only their beak size that changed. The shape of the beak, shape of the body, colors, diet, living spaces, wing size, and flight patterns all changed. How is this not a different species?
Yes, the fact that multiple species of animals exist only in one place does prove something. I will explain agian: There were originally no finches on the Galapagos Islands. When the first species of finch flew over there, they originally were one species. Once they got there, over a long period of time, they evolved into different organisms. They evolved species took different forms and these forms were not found anywhere else in the world, showing that they actually DID evolve there. God did not put them there, they evolved. One could say that a god is directing this process of evolution, or that a god put the first organisms on Earth and watched them evolve, but most certainly, all organisms were not on Earth since the beginning of time.
Who says it isn't happening today? Evolution is a very slow process compared to the human life span. You may have a few DNA mutations in an organism that make that organism more favorable to the environment, and he passes hid genes on more successfully than the other organisms without that favorable mutation. This goes on and on and it takes forever to see a noticable change in an organism. We simply have not been alive and aware of evolution long enough to notice any real changes. What simple leaps of logic? Is the actual fact of the DNA mutation in the Corona virus a leap of logic? The virus did evolve. This is a fact. Compare the definition of evolution to what happened to the virus. If you do not believe me that this virus has mutated its DNA to infect humans, I urge you to look it up. If you do believe me that the virus has mutated its DNA, then you believe that the virus has evolved. Is the fact that few finches evolved into many species of finches in a secluded area a leap of logic? As for the fossils, a very good point is explained here. This provides an excellent and blatently obvious answer to the question. I even smacked my head at how simple it was.

I shall now give you another example of proof of evolution. You may be aware that antibiotics can cease to do their job after a certain period of time. This is because the bacteria that the antibiotics try and kill evolve and mutate their DNA to become immune to the medicine. This is a very basic summary, so click on this to see it explained in further detail.

By the way, for anyone interested, there is a very interesting theory that whales and dolphins evolved from a land mammal, much like a wolf. There are many peices of evidence pointing towards this being true right now, and it actually does make sense. Where else would a swimming mammal come from ?

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
Again, I hardly dispute that your examples exist, I argue that they prove your premise. You have yet to prove that they do.[/b]

But a virus mutating its DNA is evolution. This example falls under the definition of evolution. How is this not proving evolution exists?

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
You think I am ignorant, how is that relevant? Do you expect me to throw up my hands, get disgusted or frustrated and give up because you spout a bunch of cliche'd nonsense? I say this because I think you are generally interesting in improving your ability to debate and these are amateur pitfalls. Avoid them if you wish to remain credible. [/b]

I say this because evolution is real and there are SO many things that point to its existance. Read above when I say how god and evolution CAN coexist. You can be religious and believe in evolution, which I would have no problem with, becasue religion is just another way to answer things. But shunning a factual idea merely because you let your pride in religion get in the way is not the best choice I would make. Just one thing, how is what I am saying cliche'd nonsense?

Well, to tell you the truth, I may be a weak debater because I have never really debated before. Becasue I am 14, anyone else my age is too ignorant to care about stuff, and anyone older regards my ideas as useless and looks down at me merely because of my age. It sucks not being older
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2003, 10:28 PM   #120
pinky
Recruit Pilot
pinky's Avatar
7 flights since May 2003
Location: CA
Re: Caution! Religion!

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
I've already defined the only taxinomic term we are using - species and, unless you wish to disupte it, I see no reason to debate terms.

I was merely saying that, in the big picture, what we define as a species is completely irrelevant to how a specific organsims change over time. If an organism evolves, and it is not enough for biolgists to call it a new species, the organism has still evolved. This is why I assumed that the term species as defined by taxonomists would be irrelevant to this debate.

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
You virus example is again, species adaptation. It is no different from a Collie having a litter of half Collie, half German Shepard offspring, or short necked giraffes dying off in favor of those with long necks able to forrage for food and survive. I do not argue survival of the fittest yet the original question goes unanswered and you have yet to present one single piece of evidence to show us where one specific species became another specific and different species.

You say the virus example is species adaptation, but what has it adapted to? When something adapts, it is adapting to a change in the environment. Nothing has changed to cause the virus to infect humans. It has evolved its DNA to be able to infect humans. Your dog example is completely different, because that is an example of cross-breeding, a subject completely irrelevant to evolution. The virus evolved its DNA by itself, but two different dogs mate with each other and produce a hybrid young. There is no connection. The giraffe example is another case. It is clocely related to evolution, but it is not evolution itself. What you describe with the giraffes is natural selection, part two of Darwin's theory. Evolution is the first part, and while both evolution and natural selection work together to create the end product pool of organisms, they are different. I'm glad you agree with natural selection because it is SO logical .

Anyways, I actually believe that my virus and bacteria examples are evidence, and that is because they fall under the definition of evolution. Evolution, as defined by the Oxford University Press American Century Dictionary is:
ev-o-lu-tion: - n.- 1. gradual development
2. development of a speciesfrom earlier forms, as an explanation of origins
As defined by Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary:
evo-lu-tion: - n.- 5. b. the process by which through a series of changes or steps a living organism has acquired its distinguishing morphological and physiological characters c. a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generatins
Would you disagree that my examples fall under these definitions? I really think they do, and that makes them valid examples of evolution that has happened/is happening.

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
I will bottom line it for you. Change does not equal evolution. Your entire line of argument is based on this simplified premise, i.e. we can observe change in nature therefore evolution is valid. I have proven through simple logic that your premise is invalid and have given you multiple opportunities to bring evidence to the contrary.

To my understandings, change in a species is evolution. They are one and the same, and my dictionary definitions say this as well. We can and have observed changes in species (as I have said and as you have agreed with) and this is evolution. I really don't know what else evolution could be. Just look at the definitions, or look it up on your own and see if my examples fall under the catagory, so to speak, of evolution. So, how have you disproven this with simple logic?

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
Dont' rely on simplified generalizations to make specific points. Specific questions require specific answers and specific pieces of evidence to back them up. You are the affirmative, you support the resolution: Evolution is a valid theory and the best explanation for where we came from. The burden of proof is on you. As the negative, all I need do is disprove your premise which I have clearly done.

Simplified generalizations? Are the specific virus. bacteria, and finch examples simplified generalizations? No, they are specific examples, and they back up my resolution that you so nicely put in italics. And again, how have you disproved my premise?

Quote:
Originally posted by HighWiredSith
This is where you show your own ignorance. In reality, there are only a miniscule amount of fossils that are believed by evolutionists to represent the progression of one genetically similar species into a completely and genetically different species. Off the top of my head I can think of about three disputed sets of fossils.. This represents about .001% of all known fossils. Yet even these three are highly in disupte among just the evolutionist scientist as to their origin and age. The fossil set found in Montana in the mid 1980's that was presented by geologists to be the trump card, the smoking gun to finally prove the evolution of one species into the another turned out, after DNA testing, to be the jawbone of a not-so-ancient pig.

But showing a link from one species to a completely different species is very hard if not impossible, because they are, well, completely different. That's really all there is to be said about this.
I will however say that when I talked about the fossils (the thing you quoted) I really did say that without any example in my mind proving it. I really just sort of... said it. I guess I was assuming it was true, or I just didn't want to leave a part of a previous post of yours uncountered, I don't really know. But I was at least able to counter what you said about it . Also, try and research what I said about the land mammal evolving into whales. I am unsure as to whether it has been proven, but it is an extremely interesting theory. Check this out. And this. Both sources seem to say it has been proven, but I am not sure. Research and decide for yourself.
pinky is offline Reply With Quote
Reply

← Previous Thread | Next Thread → Home > SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums > Sci-Fi Nation > Pilot's Mess [chit-chat zone]

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Religion and idiots
I had a convorsation today with this little Southern Babtist christian kid in school. And he informed me that Jews, Muslims, Hindu's, Mormons, And...
115
replies
Quotes, I have so far.
I really haven't dome much... And a this is mostly for my own use as a religious pondering person. I really enjoy the debate of ethics. This is what...
18
replies
Religion, what are you?
I am a cat
20
replies
Religion,
I think it's important that we all Know what Religion other pilot's follow. This is a mult-faith site and we all have predjudices against certain...
11
replies
Religion of Peace?
What do you guys think about Islam? Is it a religion of peace. Can it be when it's basic tenent require it's followers to dismember and destroy...
25
replies
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
 

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22 AM.
SciFlicks cannot be held liable for the opinions expressed in these public forums.
SciFlicks Copyright © 1998-2011, Popcorn Studios.
vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.