Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,898 Year: 4,155/9,624 Month: 1,026/974 Week: 353/286 Day: 9/65 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The problem with creationism and god
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 53 of 109 (585488)
10-08-2010 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by BarackZero
10-08-2010 12:39 PM


Pile on, again.
Don't let them get you down Barack, there is always a massive pile on here.
Armed only with hypothesis and theories they leap to conclusions when evidence appears to support their predictions and the best they can say is that they are tentative in their conclusions.
Tentative conclusions are hardly scientific!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by BarackZero, posted 10-08-2010 12:39 PM BarackZero has not replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 83 of 109 (586612)
10-14-2010 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by SignGuy
10-14-2010 8:56 AM


Have we ever found a skeleton of some species that showed such an un-efficient design that it was doomed to go extinct immediately? For instance, other than a sudden birth defect, have we found an evoltionary path leading to, say, a land animal with its eyes and head pearing straight the the sky not being able to see where its going?
A very good reason that this has not been found is because it would not be what we would expect if evolution were true.
Or when brains were developed, were we just lucky that they were put in a safe place and not the last place pheices travels to before exiting the body? Or put on the bottom of our feet to be stepped on?
Brains as simply a nexus point for neural tissue. As organisms evolved a complex nervous system over billions of years this was localised in the head (once cephalisation of a species occurs). But this is not always the case: octopuses have mini brains in there tenticles to control them.
How about oxygen? Doesnt the need for, the existence of, and ability to consume oxygen all need to be in place simutaneosly?
Go back far enough in time and oxygen was deadly to life on earth. We would die with no oxygen because we have evolved to be able to use it during respiration. When there was no free oxygen on Earth it was not needed, rendering your point moot.
In closing i thank evolution for never puting a mouth on any living creature in a place where that creature could not place food there on there own (ie the center of my back).
Evolution would never do this: what makes you think it ever would?
Edited by Larni, : stupid formatting

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by SignGuy, posted 10-14-2010 8:56 AM SignGuy has not replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 86 of 109 (586629)
10-14-2010 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by SignGuy
10-14-2010 9:51 AM


the need and ability to obsorb would have to become existent at the same exact moment
Not so.
The ability to utilise O2 would have been a gradual process. As the level of free O2 rose (over millions of years) the amount of organisms evolving to utilise 02 would increase.
Please be aware that evolution takes many, many generations to make significant alteration in structure and function: there are no hopeful monsters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by SignGuy, posted 10-14-2010 9:51 AM SignGuy 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