Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolutionary Adaptation
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 115 (318961)
06-08-2006 12:48 AM


quote:
Evolution is/has been about natural selection, right?
I've heard all sorts of theories about adaptation, but haven't found them all in one place.
so:
Is adaptation to an enviroment possible? Lets say you move a group of a hundred people out to an island thats made of broken glass. Assuming they died natural deaths, would their feet harden over the years? In other words, would they adapt to their surroundings and pass that on to their children?
Possible?
No, a person in the poorer countries (where everyone goes barefoot and has hardened skin) still have children that has soft feet. Our ancestors mostly had barefeet and were more physicaly stronger and hard working than todays people. We are all still born soft and need to workout to be strong.
quote:
There is some evidence that mother's who are starving (ie during a famine), will give birth to smaller kids (smaller kids will fit through smaller maternal bodies easier than big kids)...your environment can affect the offspring.
That could be because the mother was starving and didnt had enough nutrients to privide a normal sized baby. There are some short mothers though, who gives birth to larger babies, which also grow larger than their parents.
quote:
If you have some evidence bring it on but goddidit ain't gonna cut it.
If God created the universe andevery atom of this universe. It would be possible for Him to change anything He wanted in science, wouldn't He?

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Wounded King, posted 06-08-2006 4:46 AM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 24 by jar, posted 06-08-2006 9:05 AM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 115 (319716)
06-09-2006 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Someone who cares
06-08-2006 9:39 PM


quote:
And I am sorry to hear that you are a Creationist who believes in evolution.
There are many people who tries to bring peace to both sides by believing "Theistic-Evolution". They believe God created the "materials" and let evolution take over.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Someone who cares, posted 06-08-2006 9:39 PM Someone who cares has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Someone who cares, posted 06-09-2006 9:47 PM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 115 (320381)
06-11-2006 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Someone who cares
06-09-2006 9:47 PM


quote:
So, they please the world instead of standing tall for the truth?
Yeah, pretty much trying to please both sides. But it doesn't work that way. If one is right then the other is wrong.

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Someone who cares, posted 06-09-2006 9:47 PM Someone who cares has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by RAZD, posted 06-11-2006 9:34 PM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 115 (320386)
06-11-2006 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
06-08-2006 9:05 AM


Re: why Goddidit is so useless as an explanation
Sure could, and if that were true, if GOD actually did do that, then we need to abandon science and return to magic.
We cant explain how God created the animals and planets. There's no science in that. So all we can say is God did it. He spoke it, but we dont know how it all happened, because He is so much greater than us we dont understand how He is.

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 06-08-2006 9:05 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by jar, posted 06-11-2006 1:14 AM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 88 by ramoss, posted 06-12-2006 8:48 AM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 115 (320967)
06-12-2006 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by RAZD
06-11-2006 9:34 PM


Welcome to the fray btw. Is that some microscope picture for your avatar?
The fray?
Lol, yeah. It's a bubble in middle of being adjusted to the light on the camera.

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by RAZD, posted 06-11-2006 9:34 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by RAZD, posted 06-12-2006 10:19 PM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 115 (320969)
06-12-2006 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by ramoss
06-12-2006 8:48 AM


Re: why Goddidit is so useless as an explanation
If you don't know how he did it, why are you ruling out that god did it throughselection with a filter of natural selection>?
I dont believe in evolution. Im a creationist. I believe the universe was created in 7 days, 13,000 years ago. (Ill get to how I got 13,000 years later on my own topic)
So yeah, I dont believe in natural selection...actually against it.
I was just reffering to Theistic-Evolutionists that believes in God and evolution and tries to tie the sides together.

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by ramoss, posted 06-12-2006 8:48 AM ramoss has not replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 115 (321582)
06-14-2006 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by RAZD
06-12-2006 10:19 PM


You didn't answer the question about truths vs spreading falsehoods.
You also have a logical fallacy above -- they can both be wrong, thus showing ONE to be wrong does not make the OTHER right.
Enjoy.
We (cretionists) do not believe this is spreading falsehoods. As a matter of fact we think you (evolutionists) are. Thats what this forum is about, isnt it?
Yes I know just because one is proven wrong then the other isn't right. But I meant if one (Evolution or creation) is right then the other is wrong. (has to be in this case)

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by RAZD, posted 06-12-2006 10:19 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by kuresu, posted 06-14-2006 8:47 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 94 by jar, posted 06-14-2006 8:59 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 95 by RAZD, posted 06-14-2006 9:41 PM Crue Knight has not replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 115 (323652)
06-19-2006 11:43 PM


Ok let me just say, I believe in the biblical creation. But, evolution is no way part off the bible. I may even disagree in many creationists so dont say what other creationists say because I have my own belief. I believe the earth is 13,000 yrs old (11,013 BC to be exact), and the universe was created in 7 days by the word of God.
And that's what this forum is about, debating on the two topics, so dont just say you're right and we're wrong. That will go absolutley nowhere. Because in a few years, 2011, the Bible tells us the Lord will most likely return and the world will end. Then will you see the Bible is the word of God.
Edited by AdminNosy, : Topic warning!
Edited by Crue Knight, : Erasing AdminNosy's INSULTS when he edited my post.

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by kuresu, posted 06-20-2006 5:07 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 103 by RAZD, posted 06-20-2006 9:50 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 104 by Damouse, posted 06-21-2006 12:29 PM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 115 (326651)
06-26-2006 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Damouse
06-21-2006 12:29 PM


Re: Heh
the Earth is 11,013 years old? nice number. How are fossils that are older then that explained? or did god create the fossils there, trying to trick us? Light that we see from other solar systems and other galexies has been in-transit for millions of years, did god create that to fool us too?
When the world ends, god will destroy everything, the earth and the billions of light-years of unused space just there with no purpose, as anything more then 13000 light years away could not be seen anyway?
Sigh. Quite a thoery. The Debate is indeed wether you are wrong and we are right, but see, we have every privlage to do that. We can tell you you wrong wrong wrong, simple because this is a debate, and you have brought something to the table. I like to call it hot air, based on ... oh yes, absolutly nothing but the words of men from thousands of years ago at such a degree of hearsay that its a wonder people read it for truth, let alone believe it.
Everything you asked cannot be explained like 1, 2, 3.
If you read other Creationists post or maybe this link, http://www.timehasanend.org/..._time_has_an_end_ch05.html#08
, it'll explain why dating methods used today gives us what we think as old fossils. How can you be sure they work anyway? Were you there to witness the fossil decaying for a long time? Why is it that when we dig a certain depth, then there is nothing but sedimentary rock?
And light from other planets millions-billions of light years away could be seen because God made this universe mature, just as the first human, Adam was mature.
You should know better we believe the Bible was inspired by God.
BTW, weren't you in the Library at HeavenGames? I reconize your name.

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Damouse, posted 06-21-2006 12:29 PM Damouse has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Coragyps, posted 06-26-2006 9:33 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 108 by AdminJar, posted 06-26-2006 9:42 PM Crue Knight has not replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 115 (326653)
06-26-2006 9:32 PM


Questions about Natural Selection
A couple of questions pops up when I think of the theory of natural selection:
If the theory of natural selection were true, and only the stronger and the most fitting organism would promote itself, but the weaker dies, then wouldn't the earth's inhabitants lead itself towards destruction? This means the strongers will kill the weakers then we will all die.
If the theory of natural selection is true, wouldn't we be able to survive another "big bang"? Since we keep getting stronger and more complex, we would be able to survive (Or at least some animal would)another crash since the organisms were weaker before?

Read "Time Has an End" by, H. Camping for great evdence that the Bible is true and the word of God. You can read it online at Time Has An End

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Coragyps, posted 06-26-2006 10:52 PM Crue Knight has replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 115 (327340)
06-28-2006 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Coragyps
06-26-2006 10:52 PM


Re: Questions about Natural Selection
That's "the organism better adapted to the current environment" that "promotes itself," or, rather, leaves offspring. Horseshoe crabs aren't known for their ferocity or cunning, but they survive and reproduce very nicely in their little niche. Tigers are famously fierce and strong, but as we take away their natural habitat, they'll all die out. "Strong" doesn't mean "fit" in biology.
But if thing get "better" or whatever...all other things will die out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Coragyps, posted 06-26-2006 10:52 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by anglagard, posted 06-28-2006 9:58 PM Crue Knight has replied
 Message 112 by crashfrog, posted 06-28-2006 11:08 PM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 113 by NosyNed, posted 06-29-2006 2:13 AM Crue Knight has not replied
 Message 114 by RAZD, posted 06-29-2006 7:50 AM Crue Knight has not replied

  
Crue Knight
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 115 (328490)
07-03-2006 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by anglagard
06-28-2006 9:58 PM


Re: Questions about Natural Selection
Unless one species adapts better real slow and other species counter-adapt real slow.
If I understand what you are saying, that is.
Maybe I should have said, stop their line of evolution. Like if all the monkeys died (including us). But it seems as if we would be the ones who is more intelligent, so we would, and has the capability to destroy many lines of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by anglagard, posted 06-28-2006 9:58 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024