Question Evolution!

Hey Zen,Your research pretty much demolishes the majority of the questions on that brochure.I wonder if your longer answers are what Chuck77 was looking for?Kudos for going the extra mile!I have a debate with some street preachers this saturday where I will be using your findings.

Can't you just kick 'em inna nuts?

It is only legal to do that to politicians.

Hey Larni,Sometimes I would like to but I doubt that would help our position.The funniest thing is that there are two groups that preach in the same part of the mall.One on Friday night, the other on Saturday night.Each of the groups refuses to debate any points brough up by the other because the other group is wrong.They are both fundamentalist christian groups. I noticed that one of the guys I was talking to recently had the same fucking bible as one of the guys the night before.So, same god, same religion, same holy book (same fucking brand even!), yet the botgh thought that the other group are all going to burn in hell.This makes it a bit hard for us because we have to have a different playbook for each group. We have to argue against two individual versions of the truth with one set of facts.I suggested that they both show up on a saturday and work out the truth. I doubt that this will be happening any time soon.

Sorry, they have lied to you.As you must be gathering by now, if you have read any of the responses, your "15 questions" are not the magic bullets to slay evolution that you hoped they would be. They lied to you and to thousands of others. That's all they have, as they can't come up with meaningful questions to oppose the theory of evolution.Let me guess: you are young, just starting out in the real world after an upbringing which was steeped in fundamentalism. You are trying out your early learning in the real world of ideas--of all kind--where those ideas have to compete with one another. And you are finding out that some of what you were taught does not compute... Some of what you were taught is flatly contradicted by empirical evidence.You can try to hide in the cover of CMI's "campaign to refute the falsehoods of evolution" or you can judge the evidence for yourself, after folks out there (and here) have provided some of it to you. If what CMI has been telling you is correct you should have no problem defending it here. It it is incorrect you might actually learn something useful. In either case, you might just stick around here and see what happens. Nice propaganda, but can you back any of that up with real-world evidence? If you want to keep up with the theory of evolution and closely related fields, the place to start is your local library--if it is large enough. Here are the research articles in the latest issue of American Journal of Physical Anthropology:

Population genetic structure of Guizhou snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus brelichi) as inferred from mitochondrial control region sequences, and comparison with R. roxellana and R. bieti

​

Growth and the development of sexual size dimorphism in lorises and galagos

​

Evaluating ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) from southwestern Madagascar for a genetic population bottleneck

​

Association of the FTO rs9939609 polymorphism with obesity in Roma/Gypsy population

​

Mitochondrial haplogroup C4c: A rare lineage entering America through the ice-free corridor?

​

Maxillary changes and occlusal traits in crania with artificial fronto-occipital deformation

​

From parasite encounter to infection: Multiple-scale drivers of parasite richness in a wild social primate population

​

Lumbar lordosis of extinct hominins

​

A melting pot of multicontinental mtDNA lineages in admixed Venezuelans

​

A new pliopithecid genus (primates: pliopithecoidea) from castell de barber (valls-peneds basin, catalonia, spain)

​

The use of biocultural data in interpreting sex differences in body proportions among rural Amazonians

Are you prepared to debate any of those topics? Or even to read and understand them?A lot of these articles are free at this link:Just a moment...Give it a try. You might actually learn something.And you should also consider that a number of us here at this site are familiar with this journal, and many others like it. (I first started subscribing to it about 30 years ago.)To impress us you will have to do a bit of studying and stop relying on creationist websites that are lying to you.Edited by Coyote, : No reason given.Edited by Coyote, : No reason given.

Hey Coyote,I have sent the open challenge letter to CMI advising that we can and will answer the questions.I am awaiting a reply...

Looks like another group has started a campaign.It is called - Question Gravity - 15 Questions for Gravitationists.Here is the brochure - Question Gravity | PDFHere is the vid promoting the campaign - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjiFjIlAk1gThe Question Gravity campaign has as much validity as the Question Evolution Campaign.

Nice response, but I think you are wasting your time. It was obvious from the beginning he had no intention of debating or learning. I came on here a year or so ago "questioning evolution", but I came to find out what people actually believed and why people believed evolution to be true. And I learned. I still question evolution, but more from the perspective of understanding and learning. There are still things about the ToE I don't completely buy into, but I take them piece by piece and found out what the evidence truly tells me.Obviously little Jimmy has no such intent. It is just so hard and takes a lot of time to actually read and understand scientific journals such as you listed. Easier to just get your information prepackaged to say what you want it to say.HBD

Start a New Topic!We'll set you straight

Hi herebedragons and Catholic Scientist Indeed. Several here will be happy to participate. The biggest problem may be the number of responses, so I would keep it simple at the start: one question at a time.Enjoy

Sorry crashfrog. I didn't know this was such a sore point for you, and for that matter everyone. Questioning evolution. I also wasn't aware that I am considered a "troll" for questioning evolution. That's really wierd. Especially when this is a debate site for evolution/creation. I suppose the same would apply for evolutionists questioning creationism? Also wierd.I guess I could take your comments as uttlery arrogant for calling me a troll because I questionied evolution on a evolution/creation debate site and simply was wondering what people's answers were for the 15 questions.I also and amazed it takes so much explaining. You say "quite a bit of research" and cavediver says (IIRC) should he explain the thousands of papers on the subject.I hadn't realized evolution was so darn complicated. You would think with "a common anscestor" things wouldn't be so complicated that you would have to call me a troll on debating site because I had the audacity to question evolution.Evidence crashfrog is all I was really asking for. It seems it's not that simple apperantly.Everyones answers are really great and I would love to submit them to CMI to show that this is a fine campaingn as evidenced by this thread.Even tho it's not my thread I think it's a huge success thus far.Sorry to have bothered everyone here. It wasn't my intention to "(troll)?" this thread at all. That's so wierd to call me that for questioning evolution. I must not really know what a troll is.Maybe crashfrog you can start a thread on what a troll is and support it with definitions and explanations. Something you couldn't do on this thread.Thanks to everyone else who gave a detailed explanation to the answers or gave an answer to why they think the questions aren't relevant.I'm not even close to understanding evolution the way most of you are. It seems it's not easy based on a lot of your answers.That being said I wonder why I was called a troll for not knowing that, if most of you cannot even explain it "without quite a bit of research".

The sore point is only that you're asking - demanding, actually - that we do a great deal to convince you, but you don't give any indication of actually being convince-able. So why should we bother? That's what I'm getting at - you're not questioning anything. You're just copying and pasting somebody else's questions. It is a debate site, which is why we're all expressing exasperation that you don't seem to want to have anything to do with an actual debate. You just want to phone in someone else's questions and not even make an effort to defend them.It's super-boring to talk to someone like that, so why should we bother? We gave you a chance, Chuck, but the most you're willing to bring to the table is copypasta. Why bother with you until you're willing to do more work? Of course it's complicated, Chuck. Evolution is the scientific history of more than a billion years of life on Earth; it's a story that it's taken twenty thousand scientists working full-time more than 200 years to elucidate. Life is an unbelievably complex phenomenon so why would you expect the study of it to be something that would fit neatly into 250 words? Are you going to try to do the work to get closer? Or are you just going to copy and paste other people's questions?

Its kinda like that game, Othello: Their slogan is:

quote:

---

A moment to learn, a lifetime to master.

---

Evolution is, simply, random mutation plus natural selection. That's the basic concept that is fairly easy to learn. The unimaginable results that that simple process can unfold gets really complicated and can take many man-hours to fully explain.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

The sore point is loaded questions. For example, they ask why living fossils are identical to their fossilized bretheren. They aren't. Even then, the theory of evolution does not insist that every species MUST change, only that they can. When you have some honest questions that you are willing to discuss then we will be happy to have a discussion. Yes, science is a bit more complicated than "God did it". Get used to it. So I see that you support the dishonesty over at CMI. That's too bad.

Ok. Message 1and Message 43Not so much "set me straight" as I am not arguing against evolution. I am just trying to make sense of some things that just don't seem straight forward to me. In the posts I linked above I am trying to apply what I have learned about how observed evolution works to the fossil record of evolution. Unfortunately, not a whole lot of response (not as active a topic as little Jimmy's). Maybe you can provide some insight to my questions?HBD