evolution vs......

'I suppose this degeneration is down to that crazy chick that ate a fruit 6000 years ago? Very scientific that.'No , it was to do with doing as you are told by God.And since we all continue to sin its far more complicated than that.'What is your evidence that every life form on Earth appeared complete within a 6 day period around 6000 years ago?'we are the evidence,and why would six days be so impossible , havent you ever seen the brilliance of creation, 20 million years or one day is possible to God because he is God.Also i could ask were is your evidence of evolution of man? if he did evolve he did so without a trace.

quote:

---

if he did evolve he did so without a trace.

---

You mean... except for the fossils, and the genetic markers, and the recycled parts....------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

oh, are you talking about the pig tooth or the ape?
i'm sorry but scientists make mistakes whereas Newton was correct about gravity and anyone can test it.now what do you think about millions of years,problem equals extinction,or problem equals millions of years to evolve.

Mike,Newton did make a mistake, there are observations that cannot wholly be explained with Newtonian gravity & mechanics, that's why Einstein got famous, remember?It's called moderating-your-view-in-the-light-of-new-evidence. Give it a crack.Regarding the Nebraskan pig tooth, don't christians interpret their "evidence" in different ways? You can't all be right.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

'Regarding the Nebraskan pig tooth, don't christians interpret their "evidence" in different ways? 'pardon?'It's called moderating-your-view-in-the-light-of-new-evidence. Give it a crack.'no i just meant jumping off a bridge lol

And when people do, frequently, test Newton's laws of gravity they find that he wasn't correct: he was very, very close at low masses and large distances. But if you measure Mercury's orbit around the Sun, there are glitches that Newton's gravity doesn't explain, and Einstein's does. And if you measure the orbits of pulsars, or of stars around the black hole at the center of our galaxy, the glitches become much more than minor errors - Newton doesn't even get close.

ok then Newton too might have made a mistake,all i was saying is that gravity is a fact ,fine add him to the list it only confirms that i am right about scientists making mistakes.

Mike, But gravity is right, isn't it? Isn't it? Now I'm confused! I thought science was a self correcting process that eventually weeded out poor interpretations & frauds. Nebraska & Piltdown man come to mind. Nebraska man was misidentification, & Piltdown man was a fraud perpetrated upon science, & uncovered by science.So what about all those different interpretations of the bible, they can't all be right. That's a lot of Christians who have got it wrong. Maybe you should start a list of Christians who have made mistakes?That misinterpretations occur does not diminish from the overwhelming evidence in support of evolution. Cop out. You utterly failed to adress the question. Our existence alone is not evidence of a young or old earth, it is merely an observation that is irrelevant to the question at hand.If Brian wouldn't mind me repeating his question, what is your empirical evidence that all life appeared in a 6 day period on earth?Since you seem to be under the misapprehension there is no evidence of the evolution of man, I could point you to all those congruent phylogenies & cladograms telling the same story against vast odds of it occurring by chance. The functionless homologies shared between the great apes & man (STOP codons wrecking genes functions that share their loci within the great apes genus'). The fossil evidence, fossil hominids become less homo & more australopithocene the further back you go, etc. etc. etc. There are books written on the subject. No evidence, indeed!Now, your turn. No appeals to anonymous authority, please. This effectively rules out the bible since we don't know who wrote genesis, & even if you did, I suspect there would be no reason to accept that persons existence as being real, we certainly couldn't check their credentials to see if they were experts on the subject of their writings. Such "testimony" lacks the required level of support to be considered a logical argument, & is to be rejected on these grounds. Please don't shoot the messenger, I don't get to decide what a logically valid argument is, I have to meet the same standards as everyone else, & so do you. Claiming a text, that you don't know the author of/that the author actually existed/have evidence that the author is an expert in his writings in said text isn't evidence, & will not stand as a premise in a logically valid argument.So,empirical evidence only, please. Evolution bashing isn't support for a 6 day creation, either, false dichotomy, excluded middle, false dilemma.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

quote:

---

oh, are you talking about the pig tooth or the ape?

---

Well, the pig tooth was a mistake and has been cleared up for-- what? -- seventy years now. Way to stay current mike!!! What is it exactly that you such a wiz at?And, we basically are apes, so which of our near relatives are near relatives are you talking about? Please tell me this wasn't a reference to Piltdown?

quote:

---

i'm sorry but scientists make mistakes

---

I'm glad you understand at least that much.

quote:

---

whereas Newton was correct about gravity and anyone can test it

---

Newton was not right about gravity, actually. As for testing it, anyone can drop a ball off the roof; but can anyone test the formulas that actually describe gravitation? Not really, not without specialized equipment and training.

quote:

---

now what do you think about millions of years,problem equals extinction,or problem equals millions of years to evolve.

---

What?I think you asking why we didn't go extinct rather than evolve. There is no good reason, really. We got lucky. Our adaptations fit the environment well enough that we survived.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

proven facts are an altogether different thing from supposed theories.
i can test gravity but how can i test evolution?

---

Some suggestions--
-dig for fossils and expect transitional forms
-breed fruit flies/bacteria/etc and subject them to an unusual condition
-do a comprehensive research on a certain animal group and witness 'nested hierarchy'

quote:

---

proven facts are an altogether different thing from supposed theories.

---

Mike... heliocentrism, gravity, germs... these are theories, same as evolution.Lesson of the day is that "theory" doesn't mean "something you come up with after a heavy night of drinking".------------------
-----------
Dan Carroll

'I think you asking why we didn't go extinct rather than evolve. There is no good reason, really'there is so many come backs i will try to respond as best i can before i am thrown to the lions. lol.first of all what i am a wiz in is bulls--t.as for the question i asked about extinction its something that bothers me big time, i guess i should open a topic on it really,as for 'we just got lucky' this does not satisfy me i guess.'Newton was not right about gravity, actually'o.k then , but i still think gravity is a fact and if its not then maybe there is hope for my superman fantasy afterall.
as for evolution we can see by tests creatures adapt but its not necessarily evolution,i think gravity is way easier to prove.

'Some suggestions--
-dig for fossils and expect transitional forms'but also you will find the same creatures that exist now ,and they havent changed except for in size,they were much larger which agrees with my own thoughts on degeneration.'breed fruit flies/bacteria/etc and subject them to an unusual condition'but will at any stage an apple become an orange and an orange an apple,i'm not being funny just logical.

quote:

---

o.k then , but i still think gravity is a fact and if its not then maybe there is hope for my superman fantasy afterall.
as for evolution we can see by tests creatures adapt but its not necessarily evolution,i think gravity is way easier to prove.

---

Are you defining gravity as one of the four fundamental forces of the universe, or as "things fall down"?------------------
-----------
Dan Carroll

Why not simply USE g to disprove Gould? European Rolly-Poollys could indeed roll DOWN up into a US aquatic isopod's adaptive peak against the biotic competition of the other US ones that do not make a ball. That would be some time but you need not seperate the two science to think the same. I had seen the male isopod use segment legs"" four only to hold the female in the US so who is not to say that by rolling down the hill the round ones can get where only underwater females are ecologically abiotically segregating the hoxology of vertebrate and invertebrate locomotion conservation to say nothing of a larger cladistic influence in the gravity of Earth?