Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-16-2019 7:33 PM
27 online now:
4petdinos, AZPaul3, Coragyps, DrJones*, edge, Percy (Admin), xongsmith (7 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Arnold Wolf
Post Volume:
Total: 853,869 Year: 8,905/19,786 Month: 1,327/2,119 Week: 87/576 Day: 87/50 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1516
17
181920Next
Author Topic:   Evolution for Dummies and Christians
Yaro
Member (Idle past 4659 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 242 of 299 (266745)
12-08-2005 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 240 by Carico
12-08-2005 8:37 AM


Re: The "premise of evolution"?
Carico, again, no one is saying humans came from an ape.

It's a common ancestor. Did you come from your cusin? No. But you are related by virtue of your grandparents.

Millions of years agao there was an ape-like creature that lead both to humans and modern apes. No ape/human crossbreed necissary.

Oh, and please reply to this mesage Message 241

This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-08-2005 08:44 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 8:37 AM Carico has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by NosyNed, posted 12-08-2005 10:58 AM Yaro has responded

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 243 of 299 (266747)
12-08-2005 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by Yaro
12-08-2005 8:41 AM


Re: No Arguments Please!
I will listen. But if I see contradictions, am I free to point them out? I have heard the same statements about evolution for over 30 years, so I don't think there's anything new you can tell me. And then when i point out contradictions, they either change their premis or yell at me because of their contradictions. So what do you suggest I do? I know I'm going to hear things I've heard many times before. But i'm wondering if it's possible for evolutionists themsleves to see their own contradictions. Is it?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 8:41 AM Yaro has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 8:59 AM Carico has not yet responded

Yaro
Member (Idle past 4659 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 244 of 299 (266749)
12-08-2005 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by Carico
12-08-2005 8:54 AM


Re: No Arguments Please!
I will listen. But if I see contradictions, am I free to point them out?

Of course. But please, don't simply shout "AHA! SEE YOUR WRONG!" :) That get's us nowhere. If you see something you feel is in conflict, or that you don't understand, point it out. I would be happy to address the issue.

I have heard the same statements about evolution for over 30 years, so I don't think there's anything new you can tell me.

Well, from what I have read from you so far, whatever you have heard for the last 30 years is compleatly worng. I'm sorry to say, but you are very misinformed.

Look, you don't have to accept the theory. You can think it's total hogwash for all I care. But, it's important for you to understand how the theory works. I would like to explain it to you if you will listen.

And then when i point out contradictions, they either change their premis or yell at me because of their contradictions. So what do you suggest I do?

Well.... would you like to have a great Debate Topic Just you and me?

I know I'm going to hear things I've heard many times before. But i'm wondering if it's possible for evolutionists themsleves to see their own contradictions. Is it?

Sure. I'm open to the possibility that I may be wrong. But you must first learn the subject you wish to debate. Namely the ToE.

Would you like to start a great debate topic?

This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-08-2005 09:02 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 8:54 AM Carico has not yet responded

Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 859 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 245 of 299 (266751)
12-08-2005 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 240 by Carico
12-08-2005 8:37 AM


Re: The "premise of evolution"?
carico writes:

how can I understand evolution when evolutionists keep contradicting themselves? I'm simply trying to pin down your premise.

Apparently it's you who is contradicting herself. First you tell us that the "premise of evolution" is a lie, then you say that you are trying to pin down "our premise", implying you don't know what it is exactly. If you don't know what the premise is, you cannot say that it is a lie.

Is it or is it not true that evolutionists believe that man came from the ape?

If by 'ape' you mean modern apes - the apes that live now: chimpanzees, gorillas and orang-utans - then it is not true that evolutionists believe that.

Evolutionists think that modern man and modern apes have a common ancestor.

If it is true, then I am right when I say that is a premise of evolution.

That's faulty logic. Even if it were true, then you would still be wrong in calling it a premise of evolution. It would be a conclusion of evolution.

Consider the absurdity of it being a premise: how can something that happened only in the last few million years be a premise for the truth of a process that's been going on for billions of years prior to it?

I'll tell you the real premises of the theory of evolution:


  • random mutations cause living creatures to reproduce imperfectly
  • natural selection causes only the best adapted creatures to live long enough to reproduce

The conclusion from these premises is that populations change over time.

Like you have said: the truth is simple.

This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Dec-2005 02:33 PM


"We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." - Richard Dawkins
This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 8:37 AM Carico has not yet responded

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 246 of 299 (266752)
12-08-2005 9:07 AM


So is this common ancestor half-man, half-beast? If not, then how can it be common to both humans and apes? If so, then how did it develop the traits of another species without mating with it? Are you saying that animals spontaneously turn into other species without mating?
Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by Parasomnium, posted 12-08-2005 9:08 AM Carico has responded
 Message 249 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:19 AM Carico has responded
 Message 251 by Coragyps, posted 12-08-2005 9:37 AM Carico has not yet responded

Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 859 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 247 of 299 (266753)
12-08-2005 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:07 AM


Are you answering Yaro or me?

This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Dec-2005 02:08 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:07 AM Carico has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:13 AM Parasomnium has responded

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 248 of 299 (266755)
12-08-2005 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by Parasomnium
12-08-2005 9:08 AM


You.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by Parasomnium, posted 12-08-2005 9:08 AM Parasomnium has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Parasomnium, posted 12-08-2005 9:22 AM Carico has not yet responded

Yaro
Member (Idle past 4659 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 249 of 299 (266757)
12-08-2005 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:07 AM


So is this common ancestor half-man, half-beast? If not, then how can it be common to both humans and apes? If so, then how did it develop the traits of another species without mating with it? Are you saying that animals spontaneously turn into other species without mating?

Well first off, before I address this, you need to understand two concepts.

First, given the dog example (chihuahua and great dane) do you now see how one population of creatures can change to the point where they can no longer breed with a previous population?

Second, do you agree that random mutations in genes occur, and that this is the reason for genetic variation "drift"?

This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-08-2005 09:27 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:07 AM Carico has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:38 AM Yaro has responded

Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 859 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 250 of 299 (266758)
12-08-2005 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:13 AM


The ancestor is almost human, and almost modern-ape. The traits a species develops as it evolves, are not the traits of another existing species it mates with. That's not how traits are acquired.

Instead, random mutations produce individuals that are slightly different from their siblings. Some differences lead to advantages of the individual over others. There are limited resources and not all individuals survive until they can reproduce. Only the better adapted individuals get to reproduce, thus passing on their advantageous traits. This is called natural selection.

In this manner, over a long period of time, the population of a species changes.

I'll bow out now, and let Yaro talk to you a bit. We can continue this later.

This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Dec-2005 02:32 PM

This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Dec-2005 02:49 PM


"We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." - Richard Dawkins
This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:13 AM Carico has not yet responded

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5388
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 251 of 299 (266761)
12-08-2005 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:07 AM


I repeat:

APES NEVER INTERBRED WITH HUMANS!!!

Instead, animals that we, today, would likely say were some sort of ape critter bred among themselves. Perhaps one daddy fathered kids on either side of the Limpopo River. The kids on the north side moved to the woods. The kids on the south side moved to the savannah. They didn't see each other again, but kept breeding among each of their two populations.

Over a few hundreds of generations, the north woodsy family had changed just a tiny bit - they were better at climbing trees thad the daddy had been, since the kids that weren't as good at climbing didn't get as much fruit to eat, and some part of the bone and muscle changes that helped climbing were heritable.. Meanwhile, the south savannah family had changed a tiny bit, too: they stood upright more than the original daddy had. The ones that didn't inherit the oddity of standing to look around were more likely to be a cheetah snack.

In addition to those changes, the two groups were isolated from each other - first by the Limpopo, later by their preference for woods or savannah, later still by not liking each other's looks when the river was down - and finally by diverging enough genetically that they couldn't breed any more. Two species, where there once was one. No interspecies sex, ever.

APES NEVER INTERBRED WITH HUMANS!!!

Critters just bred with their own kind, got separated, and the "kind" that each had been changed, little by little. Until we wound up with chimps and humans.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:07 AM Carico has not yet responded

  
Carico
Inactive Member


Message 252 of 299 (266762)
12-08-2005 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by Yaro
12-08-2005 9:19 AM


Random mutation is exactly that. Random. It does not keep adding new genes to a cell in the same offspring over and over and over again in the same species. It is random and happens by chance. That also means that the likelihood of this mutant's offspring also having a random mutation is almost nil, ESPECIALLY adding another superior gene like the ability to talk. But that's what evolutionists propose for us to believe, which is a contradiction. The number of mutations that would have to have occured for MILLIONS of years for an ape to turn into a man is more impossible than anything in the bible!!

No. You still haven't proven how a great Dane and a Chihuaua were ever able to breed. I know it's possible for a human to manipulate genes, but not for animals themselves to do it. So without human manipulation, how can a Great Dane and a chihuahua produce offspring together? And where is the proof that they ever could?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:19 AM Yaro has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:44 AM Carico has responded

Yaro
Member (Idle past 4659 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 253 of 299 (266764)
12-08-2005 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:38 AM


Random mutation is exactly that. Random. It does not keep adding new genes to a cell in the same offspring over and over and over again in the same species. It is random and happens by chance. That also means that the likelihood of this mutant's offspring also having a random mutation is almost nil, ESPECIALLY adding another superior gene like the ability to talk. But that's what evolutionists propose for us to believe, which is a contradiction. The number of mutations that would have to have occured for MILLIONS of years for an ape to turn into a man is more impossible than anything in the bible!!

Ok.. so you agree that it happens right? Random mutations and genetic variation. That's why we get tall people, short people, dark people, light-skinned people, blond hair, black hair, etc. Just random variations in the genome that crop up over time. We agree?

No. You still haven't proven how a great Dane and a Chihuaua were ever able to breed. I know it's possible for a human to manipulate genes, but not for animals themselves to do it. So without human manipulation, how can a Great Dane and a chihuahua produce offspring together? And where is the proof that they ever could?

Humans didn't manipulate the genes. It's a process known as selective beeding. And it's essentially what goes on in nature all the time. Except in nature humans aren't doing the selecting, the environment is.

In any case, you can see that a chihuahua and great dane cannot naturaly mate? Even if size is the only reason. You agree with me there correct? That chihuhua is a dog bread to the point where it can no longer mate with other, larger, groups of dogs?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:38 AM Carico has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:49 AM Yaro has responded

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 254 of 299 (266769)
12-08-2005 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by Yaro
12-08-2005 9:44 AM


You don't seem to realize that there are always variations within each species. But calling humans the same species as apes just to say there is no God is ludicrous. Reality doesn't support that and neither does the process of reproduction. Therefore, your statement about short people, tall people, etc. is completely meaningless because they are still human beings. And by using the dog example, you're trying to show that humans and apes can cross-breed, are you not? If so, then you are suggesting bestiality which is not only impossible, but perverse as well. If not, then why bring up the dog example? I have to be offline for awhile. I'll be back later.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:44 AM Yaro has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:57 AM Carico has responded
 Message 260 by Parasomnium, posted 12-08-2005 10:11 AM Carico has not yet responded

Yaro
Member (Idle past 4659 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 255 of 299 (266773)
12-08-2005 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Carico
12-08-2005 9:49 AM


You don't seem to realize that there are always variations within each species. But calling humans the same species as apes just to say there is no God is ludicrous. Reality doesn't support that and neither does the process of reproduction. Therefore, your statement about short people, tall people, etc. is completely meaningless because they are still human beings. And by using the dog example, you're trying to show that humans and apes can cross-breed, are you not? If so, then you are suggesting bestiality which is not only impossible, but perverse as well. If not, then why bring up the dog example? I have to be offline for awhile. I'll be back later.

Carico. You didn't answer my questions. I have no alterior motive here. You are jumping to all these conclusions and it's making me feel like you aren't listening to me.

Look, just answer yes or no. We can talk about all the ramifications later, but I need you to at least come this far with me. If you don't come at least this far, you won't ever understand the ToE. Further, you will continue to look foolish even to people who hold similar beliefs to yours.

Again, yes or no.

Random mutations occur?

A population of creatures (chihuahua and great dane) can become so different from another population that they can no longer interbreed?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 9:49 AM Carico has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 10:02 AM Yaro has responded

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 256 of 299 (266776)
12-08-2005 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Yaro
12-08-2005 9:57 AM


I did answer that. Yes they do. But not to the same species generation after generation after generation. Then they are no longer random, particularly when the mutations just "happen" to keep producing superior traits over and over again.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 9:57 AM Yaro has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 10:04 AM Carico has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
1516
17
181920Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019