Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Comments (Page 2,978)

Showing posts 59,541 - 59,560 of112,792
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63624
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
I'm not sure how to word this question but ill give it a shot.
How does nature select 2 species to breed? Just guessing here but if say species A can evolve into an infinite amount of other species would there ever be a point they could all have produced a alphabet soup?
Nature doesn't select, the term natural selection is a coined one, not like the face of a mountain or the raw end. The concept of selection is not at all directed, it's not intelligent, it's whatever survives better ... and most species do not have binary breeding systems. Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors, if we didn't have a specific set of mental traits we would probably have been utterly annihilated after a few hundred years. We give such concepts human like traits so others can better relate to them, it's suppose to make it easier for you to learn, it seems to have had the opposite effect on creatards, but that's not surprising.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63625
Dec 6, 2012
 
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am pleased to see that you incorporate evolution as a theory. It will always be a theory because we don't have the fossil evidence to prove otherwise. Creation is the only adaption as to why we are even here. However, it takes humility to accept a creator.
True.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63626
Dec 6, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>It may seem a bit self proving, but a creature is "selected" when it breeds successfully. A variation that is well adapted to a specific niche will replace the variations that are not well adapted by out breeding them.
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63627
Dec 6, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Nature doesn't select, the term natural selection is a coined one, not like the face of a mountain or the raw end. The concept of selection is not at all directed, it's not intelligent, it's whatever survives better ... and most species do not have binary breeding systems. Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors, if we didn't have a specific set of mental traits we would probably have been utterly annihilated after a few hundred years. We give such concepts human like traits so others can better relate to them, it's suppose to make it easier for you to learn, it seems to have had the opposite effect on creatards, but that's not surprising.
Didn't you just say that when a mutation took place it would only remain in the genes if it was a good mutation?

"Binary breeding is a new, and highly unreliable, system of reproduction as it is more prone to errors"
Wouldn't that mean that asexual would have worked better and therefore nature would go back to being that?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63629
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)
Odds do not describe what happens at all. You are still thinking like a creatard, stop that and you will actually have time to learn instead of asking random stupid questions on a forum full of random people.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63630
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
Alright but how does it come to be that 2 of a compatible species would have come to be at the same time?(What are the odds really?)
No, quit thinking of individuals. Populations evolve, not individuals.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63631
Dec 6, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have taken those classes but it is sad to see that you did not learn what evidence is.
Similarities in DNA is evidence for evolution. It is an undeniable fact by anyone who understands evidence.
And one more point on giraffes. If the environment changed again so that grass was constantly available the extra energy required to grow a long neck would be detrimental and short giraffes would evolve again.
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63632
Dec 6, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.
Laboratory evidence can be hoaxed too. That is another reason there is peer review. Also science must be repeatable. One fossil can be hoaxed, many fossils cannot be hoaxed.

I am surprised that you have no interest in finding out what is scientific evidence.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63633
Dec 6, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Aah, idiot it is then.
NO fossil evidence, just a large gap in between. The easy way out is to say there is no creator..........freaky and isolated, solitude. No proof.........no proof.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63634
Dec 6, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Odds do not describe what happens at all. You are still thinking like a creatard, stop that and you will actually have time to learn instead of asking random stupid questions on a forum full of random people.
I always thought of thinking in odds and statistics was more a mathematical thing.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63635
Dec 6, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Laboratory evidence can be hoaxed too. That is another reason there is peer review. Also science must be repeatable. One fossil can be hoaxed, many fossils cannot be hoaxed.
I am surprised that you have no interest in finding out what is scientific evidence.
Science doesn't exsist Freakshow. Lets have a party.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63636
Dec 6, 2012
 
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't see the evidence, that's right. I was hoping for something like evidence in mutagenesis in nature or in a lab. I am really more interested in genetics than fossil records as some evidence turned out to be a hoax.
"Mutagenesis?" These things don't just happen over night, and individuals don't change much at all, you are an evolutionary transition from your parents to any offspring you have, or may have. Look in the mirror, it's happening right before you eyes right this minute ... oh wait, you won't see it that way, because ... I repeat, it's not noticeable changes on individuals, the changes are so slow, if you watched a dinosaur evolve into a bird in real time, you'd still say you were watching dinosaurs the whole time ... and even today you'd be calling the birds dinosaurs ... because you wouldn't see the changes. That's why we didn't realize it was happening until we saw the fossil record, and even then, scientists doubted it was what some thought it was until genetics filled in the blanks with some undeniable information, evidence that could only point toward evolution.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63637
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
I always thought of thinking in odds and statistics was more a mathematical thing.
Life isn't a computer. Do not confuse the two. Life follows algorithms, not math. We use the numbers to describe things, the things are not bound by those numbers. "Odds" is simply stating that we cannot predict all the variables and calculate all the factors, everything is cause and effect, we just don't know all the causes, and intelligent people don't fill in causes with guesses, just like intelligent people know that certain chemical reactions will always occur in specific instances, and that's what you are. All life is a bunch of chemical reactions, which produce the effect we call life.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63638
Dec 6, 2012
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>No, quit thinking of individuals. Populations evolve, not individuals.
The mutations take place on individuals and are passed down each mutation stacking on the last one until the changes thrive or dive right some 150-175 mutations per generation

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63640
Dec 6, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Life isn't a computer. Do not confuse the two. Life follows algorithms, not math. We use the numbers to describe things, the things are not bound by those numbers. "Odds" is simply stating that we cannot predict all the variables and calculate all the factors, everything is cause and effect, we just don't know all the causes, and intelligent people don't fill in causes with guesses, just like intelligent people know that certain chemical reactions will always occur in specific instances, and that's what you are. All life is a bunch of chemical reactions, which produce the effect we call life.
Freakshow why are you here? To spew your stupid thoughts of faithlessness? You should really get a life. You have relly no beliefs, no faith in anything. What keeps you alive? You have nothing.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63641
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
The mutations take place on individuals and are passed down each mutation stacking on the last one until the changes thrive or dive right some 150-175 mutations per generation
You really are not thinking clearly. If you want to look at it one mutation at a time, which is over simplified and a bit wrong no matter how you do it. The mutation enables an animal to have an edge of some sort. It mates and passes on its mutation. Since it helped him or her on average more of his or her progeny will survive to breed and so on. The right mutations never have to meet up in one couple.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63642
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
The mutations take place on individuals and are passed down each mutation stacking on the last one until the changes thrive or dive right some 150-175 mutations per generation
LOL!

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63644
Dec 6, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Life isn't a computer. Do not confuse the two. Life follows algorithms, not math. We use the numbers to describe things, the things are not bound by those numbers. "Odds" is simply stating that we cannot predict all the variables and calculate all the factors, everything is cause and effect, we just don't know all the causes, and intelligent people don't fill in causes with guesses, just like intelligent people know that certain chemical reactions will always occur in specific instances, and that's what you are. All life is a bunch of chemical reactions, which produce the effect we call life.
Just trying to simplify here so.
Evolution is fact.......
But their is no way to know how when why the reactions will take place how it will react or even if it will change anything?
Which would make evolution more a necessity to survive than a matter of time?

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63645
Dec 6, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
"Mutagenesis?" These things don't just happen over night, and individuals don't change much at all, you are an evolutionary transition from your parents to any offspring you have, or may have. Look in the mirror, it's happening right before you eyes right this minute ... oh wait, you won't see it that way, because ... I repeat, it's not noticeable changes on individuals, the changes are so slow, if you watched a dinosaur evolve into a bird in real time, you'd still say you were watching dinosaurs the whole time ... and even today you'd be calling the birds dinosaurs ... because you wouldn't see the changes. That's why we didn't realize it was happening until we saw the fossil record, and even then, scientists doubted it was what some thought it was until genetics filled in the blanks with some undeniable information, evidence that could only point toward evolution.
There is a lot of contradiction in your statement. If we evolved gradually how did some dino evolved into some weightless bird. That's some drastic change in size. LOL.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63646
Dec 6, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
The mutations take place on individuals and are passed down each mutation stacking on the last one until the changes thrive or dive right some 150-175 mutations per generation
You are sort of getting it. Now, you need to learn what a mutation is. A mutation is any change, any change at all, in the billions of molecules that make up the DNA. So 175 is less than a 1% change, if there are 3 billion pairs, for example, 175 mutations is 0.000000058% change. The human gene has 3 billion pairs. Now it unlikely that such a small change is even visible, think a new pimple that's passed down through generations, each generation it gets just a bit bigger, after a few hundred that pimple looks more like a mole ... a few hundred more it's now hard and pointy, but still so tiny almost no one notices it ... a few thousand more and humans have horns. Of course this hypothetical is not likely to happen, and the artificial selection are are now doing for ourselves may prevent the trait from being passed on to enough generations and it will either be replaced by something else, or just fade out completely. In the natural world, it would be a new weapon, possibly a mating feature, the possibilities of how it would influence the organism are too vast to calculate, so we often simplify it and give it an "odds" value based on statistical data, which is not right very often yet because it still needs more study. But, it happens, you are an evolutionary step from your parents, just because you were born, you have mutations in your genes.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 59,541 - 59,560 of112,792
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

233 Users are viewing the Weird Forum right now

Search the Weird Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Last Post Wins II (Nov '09) 4 min Concerned_American 4,805
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 6 min Ozzie 14,708
Boy, 9, marries 62-year-old mother of five for ... 6 min hot man 11
Woman Flees Topless After Being Caught Shoplifting 17 min Mechanic 20
Word goes to the Movies (Nov '08) 19 min Ozzie 13,984
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 27 min Lovers Kiss 53,907
Alphabetical ways to die (Jul '11) 27 min Ozzie 10,443
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 44 min Ozzie 141,172
The Night Owl Saloon (Jun '11) 1 hr poison 15,570
•••
•••