Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How can evolution be true if there are no between-stage fossils? (+ 1 more question)
izoakl
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 78 (20055)
10-16-2002 9:40 PM


i.e. lets say a girraffe came from a zebra, then why dont we have... quote 'Girrebra' fossils? We have girraffe and zebra fossils... but no 'girrebra'. (this is just some in-between form i made up).
And this goes for everything...
anyone have an answer?
--------
my next question is...
why do people argue over creation and evolution if evolution gives you NO destiny , and creation does.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by nos482, posted 10-16-2002 10:09 PM izoakl has not replied
 Message 3 by mark24, posted 10-16-2002 10:35 PM izoakl has not replied
 Message 16 by nator, posted 10-19-2002 1:16 AM izoakl has not replied
 Message 57 by arpaisley, posted 10-22-2002 10:46 AM izoakl has not replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 78 (20056)
10-16-2002 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by izoakl
10-16-2002 9:40 PM


Originally posted by izoakl:
i.e. lets say a girraffe came from a zebra, then why dont we have... quote 'Girrebra' fossils? We have girraffe and zebra fossils... but no 'girrebra'. (this is just some in-between form i made up).
And this goes for everything...
anyone have an answer?
The answer is that evolution doesn't work in that way. Your comment is a common misconception usually continued by deceptive creationist groups like the ICR.
Here is your answer:
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ
my next question is...
why do people argue over creation and evolution if evolution gives you NO destiny , and creation does.
You make your own "destiny" and the same as you make your own meaning/purpose in life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by izoakl, posted 10-16-2002 9:40 PM izoakl has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-16-2002 11:44 PM nos482 has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 3 of 78 (20057)
10-16-2002 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by izoakl
10-16-2002 9:40 PM


izoakl,
Presumably you believe in the biblical flood, right?
Can you tell me where the flood starts & ends, strata wise? For example, some creationists believe the flood starts at the beginning of the cabrian, & ends at the end of the cretateous/tertiary boundary.....
(Delshad should appreciate this...... )
Mark
------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.
[This message has been edited by mark24, 10-16-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by izoakl, posted 10-16-2002 9:40 PM izoakl has not replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 78 (20061)
10-16-2002 11:44 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by nos482
10-16-2002 10:09 PM


That is the problem nos.
The tower of Babel was disrupted by God becasue 'they wanted to make a name for themselves'. God, just as any father, created us to be sons and is dejected by sons wanting to 'name themselves' as much as any of us would be dejected at a son disowning his parent guided youth.
Hell is nothing more than finding out that by 'naming' oneself you got what you wanted but it was bottom rung compared to what you could have had.
What you call a forceful tyrant I call a loving father. This misunderstanding between parents and children in this generation exactly mimics our evasion of our heavenly father. Every teenager at one time or other thinks his parents are tyrrants. Many realise the error of their ways once they pass through this stage. It is no differnt in approaching God. The Bible even explains that the culmination of earth history will be in the 'fathers joining with the children and the children joining with the fathers'.
Read the parable of the Prodigal Son for (i) God's viewpoint, (ii) the rebellious one as well as (iii) the 'other' son who stayed home but was only complient. The concept of father/son transcends this age.
[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 10-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by nos482, posted 10-16-2002 10:09 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-17-2002 2:11 AM Tranquility Base has replied
 Message 7 by nos482, posted 10-17-2002 8:28 AM Tranquility Base has not replied
 Message 10 by derwood, posted 10-17-2002 9:50 AM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 7577 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 5 of 78 (20073)
10-17-2002 2:11 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tranquility Base
10-16-2002 11:44 PM


But remember TB, God punished his child and every generation thereafter for their "first disobedience" - not the act of a loving father, very much the behaviour of a tyrant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-16-2002 11:44 PM Tranquility Base has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-17-2002 2:50 AM Mister Pamboli has not replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 78 (20074)
10-17-2002 2:50 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Mister Pamboli
10-17-2002 2:11 AM


MP
Who knows howmany interactions occurred between God and the first couple before that time. Within the context of the entire Scriptures I believe God acted because he could see the action of genuine rebellion and loved them too much to let it pass. Just as I chastise my kids out of love (most of the time).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-17-2002 2:11 AM Mister Pamboli has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by nos482, posted 10-17-2002 8:33 AM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 78 (20094)
10-17-2002 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tranquility Base
10-16-2002 11:44 PM


Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
That is the problem nos.
The tower of Babel was disrupted by God becasue 'they wanted to make a name for themselves'.
"tower of Babel"? That is only a myth to try and explain why there are so many different languages in the world.
God, just as any father, created us to be sons and is dejected by sons wanting to 'name themselves' as much as any of us would be dejected at a son disowning his parent guided youth.
"dejected"? Is your god such a selfish monster that he/she/it would deny its children a chance to make their own lives? Your god sure is an unfit parent.
Hell is nothing more than finding out that by 'naming' oneself you got what you wanted but it was bottom rung compared to what you could have had.
You actually believe that slavery and absolute obedience is a good thing?
What you call a forceful tyrant I call a loving father.
You must have had a terrible childhood. What, your father was a control freak as well so you don't know what real love and understanding is?
This misunderstanding between parents and children in this generation exactly mimics our evasion of our heavenly father. Every teenager at one time or other thinks his parents are tyrrants. Many realise the error of their ways once they pass through this stage. It is no differnt in approaching God. The Bible even explains that the culmination of earth history will be in the 'fathers joining with the children and the children joining with the fathers'.
So, it is ok to smack down your children at least sign of independant thought or action? Like I had said, I feel pity for you, or any children you (may) have.
My grandfather had 8 children and he never beat them or was abusive to them as you think is correct. He was a loving father and husband and allowed his children to make their own choices when they were old enough. Even when their choices were wrong he would welcome them back without a word of abuse. And when he finally died, at a very old age, he didn't die alone. I guess that my grandfather would have made a better god than the one you worship since he showed real love towards his children. And another thing, he wasn't much of a church goer or religious for all that matter either even though my grandmother was. They were happily married for nearly 60 years.
[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-16-2002 11:44 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 78 (20096)
10-17-2002 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Tranquility Base
10-17-2002 2:50 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
MP
Who knows howmany interactions occurred between God and the first couple before that time. Within the context of the entire Scriptures I believe God acted because he could see the action of genuine rebellion and loved them too much to let it pass. Just as I chastise my kids out of love (most of the time).

"I'm only hurting you for your own good because I love you." That's sick.
As I had stated in an earlier thread how could Adam and Eve rebell when they didn't know the concepts in the first place? Do you beat your infants severely the very first time they may have disobeied you? Would you toss them out into the streets with nothing as well? Would you be such an unfit parent and justify this by using your god as an example?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-17-2002 2:50 AM Tranquility Base has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Peter, posted 10-17-2002 9:31 AM nos482 has replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 9 of 78 (20103)
10-17-2002 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by nos482
10-17-2002 8:33 AM


I think Adam and Eve got a warning first ... I tend to agree
with the rest though.
I'd also like to know how the god of the OT can be
reconciled against a god who wants his creations to
have free will.
But I think the question here was about transitionals ... and there
are other threads on that subject.
[Added cause I only just read it]
In New Scientist 28th September 2002 edition there is an
article on hsp90, which apparently acts to stabilise
unstable proteins, and effectively masks out some otherwise
debilitating mutations. This enables an organism to 'store up'
mutations without expressing them unless something (perhaps
environmental) disrupts the hsp90 action, then a whole
bunch of (line specific) abnormalities can show
themselves.
Made some fruit fly offspring look very different to their
parents apparently.
[This message has been edited by Peter, 10-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by nos482, posted 10-17-2002 8:33 AM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by nos482, posted 10-17-2002 10:58 AM Peter has replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 10 of 78 (20108)
10-17-2002 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tranquility Base
10-16-2002 11:44 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
What you call a forceful tyrant I call a loving father. This misunderstanding between parents and children in this generation exactly mimics our evasion of our heavenly father. Every teenager at one time or other thinks his parents are tyrrants. Many realise the error of their ways once they pass through this stage. It is no differnt in approaching God. The Bible even explains that the culmination of earth history will be in the 'fathers joining with the children and the children joining with the fathers'.
Read the parable of the Prodigal Son for (i) God's viewpoint, (ii) the rebellious one as well as (iii) the 'other' son who stayed home but was only complient. The concept of father/son transcends this age.
Funny thing about all that - we put parents in jail when they slaughter thier children, regarldess of the reasoning behind it.
You myrmidons WORSHIP this vile murderer!
I cannot comprehend it..
[This message has been edited by SLPx, 10-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-16-2002 11:44 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 78 (20116)
10-17-2002 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Peter
10-17-2002 9:31 AM


Originally posted by Peter:
I think Adam and Eve got a warning first ... I tend to agree
with the rest though.
Warning, what's a warning? If you have no real concept of right or wrong, good or evil what does the concept of consequences mean to you? Nothing.
[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Peter, posted 10-17-2002 9:31 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by gene90, posted 10-18-2002 2:37 PM nos482 has replied
 Message 44 by Peter, posted 10-21-2002 6:32 AM nos482 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 12 of 78 (20194)
10-18-2002 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by nos482
10-17-2002 10:58 AM


[QUOTE][B]If you have no real concept of right or wrong, good or evil what does the concept of consequences mean to you? Nothing.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
The warning was in the form of, 'If you eat of the tree, then you will die.' I think that one can understand consequences without understanding good or evil. I can throw an apple up in the air and understand that it can smack me in the head on the way down as a result of my action but it doesn't mean there is anything evil about it. The question is whether one who has not seen death (physical or spiritual) can truely comprehend the warning. That I think is a valid issue that needs to be discussed. At any rate, a great deal was learned from eating the Tree of Knowledge, both of agency and consequences.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 10-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by nos482, posted 10-17-2002 10:58 AM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by nos482, posted 10-18-2002 3:31 PM gene90 has replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 78 (20201)
10-18-2002 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by gene90
10-18-2002 2:37 PM


Originally posted by gene90:
The warning was in the form of, 'If you eat of the tree, then you will die.' I think that one can understand consequences without understanding good or evil. I can throw an apple up in the air and understand that it can smack me in the head on the way down as a result of my action but it doesn't mean there is anything evil about it. The question is whether one who has not seen death (physical or spiritual) can truely comprehend the warning. That I think is a valid issue that needs to be discussed. At any rate, a great deal was learned from eating the Tree of Knowledge, both of agency and consequences.
Die, what's a die? Remember, they had no concept of death either since there was none (Physical or otherwise). Death came afterwards. As well as pain and suffering. All of these things were suppose to be the result of eating the apple.
The Simpson's did a funny short on Adam and Eve once and they had Homer (Adam) jumping off of waterfalls unto the rocks below without hurting himself and as well many other things which are deadly now.
Like I had said, do you toss your children out into the streets with nothing the very first time they may have disobeyed you and they were too ignorant to realize what they had done? In order for there to be consequences one first must understand the concept of right/wrong and good/evil. This is the main flaw in the myth of Adam and Eve.
[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by gene90, posted 10-18-2002 2:37 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by gene90, posted 10-18-2002 11:54 PM nos482 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 14 of 78 (20220)
10-18-2002 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by nos482
10-18-2002 3:31 PM


[QUOTE][B]Die, what's a die? Remember, they had no concept of death either since there was none (Physical or otherwise).[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Uh yeah Nos. I mentioned that.
[QUOTE][B]Like I had said, do you toss your children out into the streets with nothing the very first time they may have disobeyed you and they were too ignorant to realize what they had done?[/QUOTE]
[/B]
I don't see it that way. The fall was a good thing. The warning was just that, a warning, not a commandment.
One of our peculiar Scriptures: "Adam fell that men might be, and men are that they might have joy."
[QUOTE][B]This is the main flaw in the myth of Adam and Eve.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
If you don't understand it.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 10-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by nos482, posted 10-18-2002 3:31 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 10-19-2002 1:11 AM gene90 has not replied
 Message 18 by nos482, posted 10-19-2002 8:14 AM gene90 has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 15 of 78 (20222)
10-19-2002 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by gene90
10-18-2002 11:54 PM


I have one thing to say about the Garden of Eden topic...
Eve was framed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by gene90, posted 10-18-2002 11:54 PM gene90 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Quetzal, posted 10-19-2002 4:03 AM nator 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