|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution for Dummies and Christians | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6486 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Great. So we agree. Random mutation occurs.
And you can also see how one group can change to the point where it can no longer interbreed with a previous group? Please answer this question as well. Once we agree here. I can explain to you how random mutation works. This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-08-2005 10:04 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carico Inactive Member |
I'd like to qualify my answer. Mutations can "appear" to be random, but there is always a reason for them even if humans don't know what it is. So no, I don't believe in random mutation. I believe that mutation happenes even though we might not know what caused it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6486 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
I'd like to qualify my answer. Mutations can "appear" to be random, but there is always a reason for them even if humans don't know what it is. So no, I don't believe in random mutation. I believe that mutation happenes even though we might not know what caused it. I can agree with that, sure. There are many factors that go into gene copying. We certainly can't pinpoint them all! So yes. I am also a determinst. So I don't see a problem with your view on this So now, the population change issue. We now agree that a population CAN change to the point where they can no longer interbreed with the previous population?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Carico,
I am telling you officially:
No one is suggesting anything about humans mating with animals. If you come back with that argument again, after reading this, then everybody will know for certain that you don't listen. Now, could you just shut up for a while, and take you fingers out of your ears? Please, listen to Yaro, answering only yes or no. No buts, no insinuations, no jumping to conclusions, just yes or no. Please? {added by edit: sorry if this is a bit out of line, the conversation has moved on since I started writing this message.} This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-Dec-2005 03:13 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carico Inactive Member |
Everything in the universe happens for a reason because the universe is based on cause-effect. That is the basic principle that scienitsts rely on for logic, how electricity works, how nuclear energy works, how each cell works, how gravity works, and on and on. Yet scientists at the same time say things are random and there is no design! This is an oxymoron. But this is what happens when people defy God and try to play God themselves. Endless contradictions that lead them back to the same questions because they admit their previous theories were incorrect. This is just a game to deny God and people who have the audacity to think they know better than God will indeed look foolish. As Jesus said; "He who exalts himself will be humbled." And that has been shown to be true in every scientific theory that contradicts God's laws. When scientists agree with God, they will always be right. When they disagree with him they will always be wrong and look foolish as well. I really do have to go somewhere and will be back later.
This message has been edited by Carico, 12-08-2005 10:14 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNWR Inactive Member |
Carico,
Yaro has kindly offered to have a "Great Debate" with you. In a "Great Debate", only you and Yaro would be discussing. You would not have to answer the same thing several times to several different people. You could concentrate on Yaro's answers, and she would be able to better explain to you what evolutionists really believe and where they agree with you. I think you could learn a lot in a one-on-one debate. And maybe we could learn something from you, too. It would also be easier on you than your current open debating, since you would only need to respond to one person. Our Great Debates are pretty informal, and often can be quite friendly (even though the debaters disagree). Can you let us know if you would like to have a one on one debate setup between just you and Yaro. To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
FliesOnly Member (Idle past 4135 days) Posts: 797 From: Michigan Joined: |
Carico writes: Correct. Apes did not turn into humans nor are we their descendants. What we say is that apes and humans share a common ancestor.
So now are you saying that apes did not turn into humans and we are not descendants of apes? Carico writes: I never said that.
And you have no patience with ME? Carico writes: What exactly is our premise? In the first sentence, you say we have no premise. In the next sentence you say we constantly change our premise. And in the third sentence you say our premise is a lie. Wow, I'm impressed...three consecutive contradictory sentences. You guys can't even agree on a premise! Or you change it as fast as the weather. But that's what happens when the premise is a lie. You need to relax a bit and maybe do some reading about the ToE. You seem to have some typical creationist’s ideas about the theory and claims made by evolutionary biologists. Your "apes to man" argument is one such example. I'll repeat this so we are clear...Nowhere in the ToE is such a claim supported nor does any evolutionary biologist makes such a claim.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
Correct. Apes did not turn into humans nor are we their descendants. What we say is that apes and humans share a common ancestor. Would it not be better to say that modern apes did not turn into humans nor are we their descendants. The last common ancestor of 'apes' and humans would almost certainly be classified as an ape. Taxonomically after all humans are still classified as apes. TTFN, WK
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Carico, again, no one is saying humans came from an ape. To be fair, Yaro, we (as a group) have been using words hastily in ways that could easily appear both contradictory and are confusing. "Ape" is not a technical term and is not well defined in this discussion. Carico has been told humans are apes, did not come from apes and did come from ape like creatures. All of which are true because the word "ape" is used in different ways. Certainly a receipe for confusion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6486 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Definitions:
Ape = Any member of the order primates. Modern-Apes = Commonly denotes any currently existing, non-human, member of the order primates. Ape-Like Ancestor = An ancient member of the order primates which possesed both human and modern-ape qualities which lies in the direct chain of descent to modern H. Sapiens. Common Ancestor = An ancient member of the order primates from which descend modern-Apes, the human Ape-Like ancestor, and humans themselves. ABE: An 'order' is a mid-level taxanomic rank. Traditionaly it follows directly after the higher-level rank 'class' (though there are finer grained ranks in-between). An example of a class would be mammalia 'mammals' an order would be 'primates'. A rough equivocation would be "types of mammals" though, of course, the distinction is much more technical than this. Clear? Anything anyone else would like to add? This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-08-2005 11:23 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
FliesOnly Member (Idle past 4135 days) Posts: 797 From: Michigan Joined: |
Wounded King writes: While technically, yes, you are correct and I'd agree, I will not accept that Carico, after an admitted thirty years of hearing about the ToE, does not understand the difference. Would it not be better to say that modern apes did not turn into humans nor are we their descendants. The last common ancestor of 'apes' and humans would almost certainly be classified as an ape. Taxonomically after all humans are still classified as apes. His line of argument is utter BS and it gets a bit tiring reading it over and over again. If he chooses to play word games, then fine, it only solidifies my belief that he doesn't want to hear anything about the ToE that contradicts his preconceived notions. By the way, I've always wanted to point out that for reasons I cannot explain, I absolutely love your avatar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Anything anyone else would like to add? You might explain what an "order" is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Anything anyone else would like to add? Carico spoke of her husband, hence she is a woman, unless she is a Christian fundamentalist married homosexual, which is rather unlikely. So, let's all use the proper personal pronouns when mentioning her.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
well. the moon has like a 14 year expanded cycle... our months only sort of correlate. they are far better correlated to the 365.25 day year. and we have 30 and 31 day months cause some roman emperors thought they were more important than others. or some other ridiculous mythology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3918 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
kingdom
phylum class order family genus species they're artificially assigned categories used to identify living things and how similar or dissimilar they are.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024