Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,414 Year: 3,671/9,624 Month: 542/974 Week: 155/276 Day: 29/23 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ERV's: Evidence of Common Ancestory
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 114 of 166 (505185)
04-08-2009 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by pcver
04-08-2009 10:04 AM


Re: Playing poke-a-Goliath
I don't want to add more to your plate, however this caught my eye and could be the root of the issue.
pcver writes:
The evolution theory must be proven by evidence of species evolving into species, no more, no less.
Are you under the assumtion that evolution is a species(fish) evolving in a single generation into another species(lizard)?
Do you know what descent with slight modification is?

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by pcver, posted 04-08-2009 10:04 AM pcver has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 120 of 166 (505239)
04-09-2009 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by pcver
04-09-2009 2:54 AM


Re: Playing poke-a-Goliath
It does not matter how long evolution take as long as an incremental evolutionary process exists within the lifetime of a species. This does means that if an animal has a short lifespan of 1 month, then within its short lifespan (of one month) something must happens to demonstrate evolution is occurring.
So you are expecting to see actual morphological changes while the individual animal is alive? That's what you expect evolution to be? That's what you require as evidence?
I suggest before you continue in this thread you take a minute, or a few years, and realy open a few books on the subject. You would really gain a lot by actually learning what it is you're trying to debate.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : changed "species" to "animal"...

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by pcver, posted 04-09-2009 2:54 AM pcver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Percy, posted 04-09-2009 9:47 AM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 123 of 166 (505264)
04-09-2009 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Percy
04-09-2009 9:47 AM


Re: Playing poke-a-Goliath
Guessing you meant to say "while the *animal* is alive?" Or "while the *individual* is alive?"
I did, and thanks for catching that, Percy. Early morning posts are always a bit foggy. Late night drinking may be the cause. - lol
I have corrected it.
- Oni

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Percy, posted 04-09-2009 9:47 AM Percy has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 132 of 166 (505348)
04-10-2009 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by pcver
04-10-2009 11:19 AM


Wrong conceptual view
Are you so surprised to hear I expect to witness evolution in action?
Not really.
Most creationist expect the same thing because they have such a gross misunderstanding of what "evolution" means that within 2 post I was able to realize exactly where your misunderstanding was.
Thanks for proving my original point.
Of course I expect to see evolution in motion when something is alive, not when they are dead. It can be a morphological change; a process; or any event that can be scientifically identified as truly evolutionary.
Let's just clarify your position. You expect to witness, for example, a lizard give birth to an animal that, within the course of it's actual life time, changes into another species that's not a lizard?
Is this your understanding of evolution?
Due to the fact that no one has ever observed an evolutionary process, we are told by evolutionists that evolution is so slow it cannot be observed.
You are told by which evolutionist that evolution cannot be observed? Where did you get that from?
Be honest, have you taken any post-high school Biology classes that delve into evolution?
This is a lie.
Since you made the statement, and I've never heard anything like that coming from a Biologist, you, sir, are the liar. - Unless you care to back that statement up with some evidence?
Think outside your square instead of reading books that continue the myth that evolution, if true, is impossible to be observed, (because it takes too long).
Yes, yes, books with talking snakes, guys who are born of virgins and are known to walk on water are much less mythical than biology.
- Oni

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by pcver, posted 04-10-2009 11:19 AM pcver has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2972 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 141 of 166 (505456)
04-11-2009 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by pcver
04-11-2009 11:01 AM


Evolution confusion
I see I got some feathers ruffled. Good, I appreciate the honest emotion.
Strangely, as someone who didn't want to add more to my plate, you're surely getting my undivided attention right now.
Well kindness lets one in the door, then I show my true intent.
"Evolutionists have told me evolution is happening everywhere right now". Now that's a lie too....If your objection is that the word "lie" is too heavy-sounding then I would agree. Afterall some evolutionists sincerely believe it's silly to expect to observe evolution whilst others sincerely believe evolution is happening everywhere. If people are sincere in their belief in untruth then they cannot be regarded as telling a lie, right?
And all of this is summed up with one point, you don't have the first clue what evolution is and are therefore are looking for an answer that does not exist.
Evolvement is simply desent with modification. Mutation, natural selection and speciation add up to what is defined as "evolution".
Mutations, are observed.
Natural selection, is observed.
Speciation, is observed.
All 3 of the mechanisms that organisms use to evolve are visible, making "evolution" an observed phenomenon. That is what is meant by "evolution is observed".
Now, that you want to see morphological evolvement in a single individual as "proof" of evolution is both wrong and a strawman. First understand what evolution is then debate it.
Errr.... You ask me for some evidence, but call me a liar even before I come back with evidence?
So you've never heard something like that coming from a Biologist? Do some Biologists tell you things, like calling you personally or send you emails? I guess not...perhaps no Biologist ever heard of your name.
No, I've never heard a biologist claim this that you stated:
pvcer writes:
Due to the fact that no one has ever observed an evolutionary process, we are told by evolutionists that evolution is so slow it cannot be observed. This is a lie.
That above statement is made up bullshit. There are many biologist on this site. Many at my University. Many are actual friends of mine which I hang with, I even know 2 comics, which is my profession, who are biologist. I have never heard that "evolution is so slow that it can't be observed".
Now either back up that statement or face the fact that biologist, or better yet, evolutinary biologist, have never meade this claim.
But where/when did I ever said that a Biologist had made that claim?
I only mentioned evolutionists, (but not Biologists).
Are you serious????
The proper term is Biological Evolution, look it up at any school website.
Trying to tell lies again? Are there many talking snakes in the Bible, as well as multiple guys who are born of multiple virgins? Care to back your statement up with some evidence?
Yes, there is a talking snake, aka. the devil in drag.
You are right, there is only one fella who was born of a virgin, in the Christian bible.
Listen boy
There used to be a poster here that would like to address people like that, me specifically, on a few occasions. Honestly, I'm 33 years old, but boy is cool. Unless you are being condescending, in which case you can go fuck yourself.
Go back to a primary school that may fix your behavioral issue (including pot-smoking).
My behavior? Pot? Please, you have no clue what you're talking about or who you're talking to. I have a very extensive education in a variety of fields. Try me pops.
Edited by onifre, : Erased a few remarks in regards to Percy's post about the forum guildlines to not insult.

"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by pcver, posted 04-11-2009 11:01 AM pcver 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