Evolution vs. Creation

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

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74483 Feb 7, 2013
MADRONE wrote:
<quoted text>
Breeders have been able to produce a wide range of breeds among animals they've worked with. The variations they have to work with are the same as those for natural selection. There goes your claim.
the fact that all dogs came from one species would be another good example. ion only 15,000 years or so...

Hmmmm...what happened to that millions of years bullshit?

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74484 Feb 7, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they predicted they would CHANGE faster. Once again, your using the wrong word, not the evolutionary model. It does not support the model at all, just the fact that things CHANGE.
No one can argue that things don't change. Adopting to a new environment is evidence of change ... not evolution.
Oh look, it's cold.
Let me put on a jacket.
I've changed my form, and my outside appearance.
Evolution!
See how foolish you are? You don't even understand the very science you proclaim to support.
no, it predicted they would evolve faster.and they have. more of that evidence you say doesn't exist.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#74485 Feb 7, 2013
Yeah, and here is more of the science that is not being performed by scientists who don't really believe in the Theory of Evolution that answers a question about the development of lungs.

BRAND NEW, AS OF TODAY (2/7/2013).

CT scans help answer question of how fish lungs evolved.

February 7th, 2013 in Biology / Evolution

http://phys.org/news/2013-02-ct-scans-fish-lu...

( Phys.org )—One of the great problems of evolution is to understand how the major features of organisms have changed over great swaths of time. How did limbs evolve from fins? How did bird feathers arise from scales?

The lung is a major organ of great functional importance for vertebrates (animals with backbones). Since the mid-19th century, most biologists have thought that in living fishes, gas bladders—internal bags of air to which fishes can add or eliminate oxygen to control buoyancy—are simply a modified version of an ancestral pair of lungs. Others think lungs and gas bladders are completely different organs.

New research at Cornell using computed tomography (CT) technology has gone a long way toward showing that lungs and gas bladders really are variations of the same organ.

Watch the QuickTime video of the scan of a Florida gar: down through the spine, out to the inside surface of the interlocking sheath of heavy scales that encases a gar, and then into the central chamber of the gar's swim bladder, traveling all the way to the front of the swim bladder, just behind the head.

By proving that several ray-finned fishes, namely sturgeons and paddlefishes, as well as bowfin, have pulmonary arteries like those that supply the lungs of vertebrates, the researchers show that the common ancestor of all these fishes must have originally had lungs supplied by a pulmonary artery.

The micro-CT enabled researchers to look at resolutions of 25 microns, about the width of a human hair. "This is biology as we've never been able to see it before," said Amy McCune, co-author of the study and professor and chair of ecology and evolutionary biology. "We're studying biological diversity from the inside out."

The paper's lead author, Sarah Longo '11, a graduate student at the University of California-Davis, began the research for her honors thesis with McCune. Mark Riccio, director of the Cornell Multiscale CT Facility in the Institute of Biotechnology, is also a co-author; the paper was published Feb. 5 in the online version of the Journal of Morphology.

"Using our state-of-the-art, high-resolution X-ray CT scanners, we noninvasively created 3-dimensional datasets that could be examined from multiple perspectives," explained Riccio. By studying the CT scans of blood vessels filled with X-ray opaque barium in lungfishes, bowfin and several other related fishes, the Cornell researchers showed that other fishes in the lineage that includes bowfin actually have tiny vestigial pulmonary arteries, which branch off from a parent vessel in the same way that pulmonary arteries branch in tetrapods and lungfishes. The arteries in gas bladder fish, therefore, are actually vestigial pulmonary arteries that have been co-opted for new functions. The researchers hypothesize that this evolutionary change occurred either by the loss of respiration or by dorsal shifts in the anatomical structures of these fishes.

Longo points out that scientists have known about the vestigial arteries for a long time, but because traditional dissection and corrosive casting techniques lose detail, no one made the connection with pulmonary arteries. "One of the great things about this research was that by using a new technique and having an undergraduate look at it with fresh eyes we found something new," says Longo.

Provided by Cornell University

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74486 Feb 7, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they predicted they would CHANGE faster. Once again, your using the wrong word, not the evolutionary model. It does not support the model at all, just the fact that things CHANGE.
No one can argue that things don't change. Adopting to a new environment is evidence of change ... not evolution.
Oh look, it's cold.
Let me put on a jacket.
I've changed my form, and my outside appearance.
Evolution!
See how foolish you are? You don't even understand the very science you proclaim to support.
so dude, still waiting for those "more interesting' theories to replace evolution...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#74487 Feb 7, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you know more about science than i yet you say the bing bang was an explosion? that it came from nothing?
no, you just proved that you do not, in any way, no more about this than i do, or my grandson and he is not even in schoolyet.
Yo-yo rejects evolution. Yo-yo rejects creationism. Yet here he is on a forum entitled Evolution vs. Creation telling the rest of us to get a life and move on.

Pretty damn funny when you think about it.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74488 Feb 7, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you most certainty will die.
nad that is the end of my existence. like every other living creature. done. fini. pfft.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Long Beach

#74489 Feb 7, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, science is not alive with a will of it's own.
I hate to break it to you, but your mythology is just that ... a myth.
People are doing what they always do, however, if that is what you meant.
And screwing things up, including science. That is inevitable.
Please tell us about your mythology.

You don't seem to have sufficient gravitas to have discovered that modern day science is wrong and you know how and why that is. Do you have science degrees in ALL the relevant fields that somehow impact on evolutionary theory??

Perhaps you could take some time and write up a paper on how wrong today's scientific take on evolution is. All you're doing here is stating that, in your opinion, this science is ALL wrong. We need details.

Science has already stated it's opinion and provided proof, we need to see yours proof.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74490 Feb 7, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't aware I was before a panel of learned men.
Sorry I state things in laymen's terms so that people like you might better understand the basics.
But you are just whining at this point. You know you have nothing. You've been whining about me coming along as challenging your world view since the beginning.
Not a single person has provided supporting evidence for evolution. Not one of you has explained how there are another mutations to make the theory work.
You just lean on more learned men and women than yourself, and point to their articles as the authority, and proclaim them to be right, without checking the evidence yourself.
That makes you a religious fanatic. How does that make you feel?
No. not even close, but nice try. a religious fanatic buys onto a cult with no evidence whatsoever.

i look at evidence and rationally decide whether to agree with it or not.

you can't even get those terms right, just parroting what you heared otheres say without checking the veradcity of the argument. you sir, seem to be the fanatic.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#74491 Feb 7, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you do not understand what a scientific theory is.
Do you know what science claims is does with a proven failed theories?

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74492 Feb 7, 2013
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't aware I was before a panel of learned men.
Sorry I state things in laymen's terms so that people like you might better understand the basics.
But you are just whining at this point. You know you have nothing. You've been whining about me coming along as challenging your world view since the beginning.
Not a single person has provided supporting evidence for evolution. Not one of you has explained how there are another mutations to make the theory work.
You just lean on more learned men and women than yourself, and point to their articles as the authority, and proclaim them to be right, without checking the evidence yourself.
That makes you a religious fanatic. How does that make you feel?
Don't give me that " i was dumbing it down for you" bullshit. You clearly tried to use the argument that something from nothing like the big bang was impossible.

you are not very good at logic...are you?

i know you are not very good at lying, or thrying to cover uyp your mistakes with lies.

seriously, dude, you are making a bigger fool of yourself the longer you try to back up shit you do not comprehend.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#74493 Feb 7, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> We have heard many people who have said that, but today where are they? they are dead and buried. Fighting God or trying to disprove God, is like fighting death or trying to disprove death.
LOL! I'd bet you were actually drooling when you typed that!

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#74494 Feb 7, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> So, Mr. Know all, give me the translation of the words into?
"into" is only one word

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74495 Feb 7, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know what science claims is does with a proven failed theories?
Depends..did it fail entirely or just part of it?

gracity is afailed theory , do you not believe in gravity?

which particular theories are you refering to?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#74496 Feb 7, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the fact that all dogs came from one species would be another good example. ion only 15,000 years or so...

Hmmmm...what happened to that millions of years bullshit?
Russia did it in 50 years.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/03/tam...

The fox-farm experiment's role in unraveling that complexity is all the more remarkable for how it began. The Soviet biology establishment of the mid-20th century, led under Joseph Stalin by the infamous agronomist Trofim Lysenko, outlawed research into Mendelian genetics. But Dmitry Belyaev and his older brother Nikolay, both biologists, were intrigued by the possibilities of the science. "It was his brother's influence that caused him to have this special interest in genetics," Trut says of her mentor. "But these were the times when genetics was considered fake science." When the brothers flouted the prohibition and continued to conduct Mendelian-based studies, Belyaev lost his job as director of the Department of Fur Breeding. Nikolay's fate was more tragic: He was exiled to a labor camp, where he eventually died.

Secretly, Belyaev remained dedicated to genetic science, disguising his work as research in animal physiology. He was particularly consumed with the question of how such an incredible diversity of dogs could have arisen from their wolf ancestors. The answer, he knew, must lie at the molecular level. But even outside the Soviet Union, in the 1950s, the technology to sequence an animal's genome—and thereby try to understand how its genes had changed through history—was an impossible dream. So Belyaev decided to reproduce history himself. The silver fox, a fellow canid and close cousin of dogs that had never been domesticated, seemed the perfect choice.

Lyudmila Trut's first job as a grad student, in 1958, was to travel around to Soviet fur farms and select the calmest foxes she could find, to serve as the base population for Belyaev's experiment. The prohibition on genetic studies had thawed since Stalin's death in 1953, and Belyaev set up shop in Siberia at the newly minted Institute of Cytology and Genetics. Still, he was careful to frame the study only in terms of physiology, leaving out any mention of genes. Trut recalls that when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev arrived to inspect the institute, he was overheard to say, "What, are those geneticists still around? Were they not destroyed?" Protected by the careful politics of Belyaev's boss and favorable articles on genetics written by Khrushchev's journalist daughter, the fox-farm experiment quietly began.

By 1964 the fourth generation was already beginning to live up to the researchers' hopes. Trut can still remember the moment when she first saw a fox wag its tail at her approach. Before long, the most tame among them were so doglike that they would leap into researchers' arms and lick their faces. At times the extent of the animals' tameness surprised even the researchers. Once, in the 1970s, a worker took one of the foxes home temporarily as a pet. When Trut visited him, she found the owner taking his fox for walks, unleashed, "just like a dog. I said 'Don't do that, we'll lose it, and it belongs to the institute!'" she recalls. "He said 'just wait,' then he whistled and said,'Coca!' It came right back."

Simultaneously, more of the foxes began to show signs of the domestication phenotype: floppy ears retained longer in development and characteristic white spots on their coats. "At the beginning of the 1980s, we observed a kind of explosion-like change of the external appearance," says Trut. The research had expanded to include rats in 1972, followed by mink and—for a brief period—river otters. The otters proved difficult to breed and the experiment was eventually abandoned, but the scientists were able to shape the behavior of the other two species in parallel with the foxes.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#74497 Feb 7, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Depends..did it fail entirely or just part of it?

gracity is afailed theory , do you not believe in gravity?

which particular theories are you refering to?
Falsification. An important point here is that if the prediction fails then the theory must be discarded or changed. If it was really his superior intelligence, then the prediction would be that the two friends would either agree that only his shadow had the aura, or perhaps they would see no aura at all (because of their inferior intelligence!). The simple observation that each sees his own aura falsifies his theory because not all three can have an intelligence superior to both the others.

These three steps are usually repeated over and over, often refining the theory after each set of new observations or experiments, with increasingly difficult testing hurdles for the theory to overcome. The most valuable theories are those which make precise and risky predictions, which could easily disprove the theory if they failed.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74498 Feb 7, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Falsification. An important point here is that if the prediction fails then the theory must be discarded or changed. If it was really his superior intelligence, then the prediction would be that the two friends would either agree that only his shadow had the aura, or perhaps they would see no aura at all (because of their inferior intelligence!). The simple observation that each sees his own aura falsifies his theory because not all three can have an intelligence superior to both the others.
These three steps are usually repeated over and over, often refining the theory after each set of new observations or experiments, with increasingly difficult testing hurdles for the theory to overcome. The most valuable theories are those which make precise and risky predictions, which could easily disprove the theory if they failed.
No, if a prediction of a scientific theory fails one does not always throw out the whole theory.

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#74499 Feb 7, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want evidence for something like vampires and Dracula.
Eye C.
Have you seen the Twilight Saga? That explains why wolves can turn into humans. lol
Actually, Cybele, i was mistaken. i have seen magic...

i had been dinking scotch at my favorite pub with a stranger when the barkeep called time and we stumbled into the parking lot. i was calling a cab when my partner in drunkeness said " if you pay for my cab ride home, i have some nice 20 year old at home and i'll show you my talking gong that can tell time."

Intrigued, and drunk, it sounded plausible so we went to his flat and had a nice pour of the scotch.

"So where's this magic gong, dude." i asked

We went into his bedroom and there, above the wall over his bed was this huge gong. he grabbed the stick and gave it a huge swing...GOOONNNGGG!!!!

as the reverberations ceased he held up his hand in the world-wide symbol for 'wait for it' and this loud voice emanated from the wall..

"It's Four-thirty in the freakin' morning you jackass!!"

magic gong....

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#74500 Feb 7, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
Tell me how the universe came into form?
How is an Evolutionist responsible for explaining that?
Tell me why despite our level of intelligence in the Arts, Social Sciences and Sciences we still end up dying?
How is an Evolutionist responsible for explaining that?

“water water water water water ”

Since: Oct 07

the place with Pyramid Head

#74502 Feb 7, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, Cybele, i was mistaken. i have seen magic...
i had been dinking scotch at my favorite pub with a stranger when the barkeep called time and we stumbled into the parking lot. i was calling a cab when my partner in drunkeness said " if you pay for my cab ride home, i have some nice 20 year old at home and i'll show you my talking gong that can tell time."
Intrigued, and drunk, it sounded plausible so we went to his flat and had a nice pour of the scotch.
"So where's this magic gong, dude." i asked
We went into his bedroom and there, above the wall over his bed was this huge gong. he grabbed the stick and gave it a huge swing...GOOONNNGGG!!!!
as the reverberations ceased he held up his hand in the world-wide symbol for 'wait for it' and this loud voice emanated from the wall..
"It's Four-thirty in the freakin' morning you jackass!!"
magic gong....
sounds like you had some good times

Level 1

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#74503 Feb 7, 2013
Satan sucks

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Can you believe Zayne left One Direction???? 1 min andet1987 11
Things to do while waiting........ 4 min SLY WEST 320
"man" words 4 min Connie Cha-Ching 652
Add 2 Letters to Complete a Word 5 min andet1987 401
Who doesn't have a Topix crush? (Apr '13) 5 min David0407 399
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 9 min wichita-rick 159,746
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 10 min ms_Sweeter 8,090
Name a smell you love to smell! (Jan '14) 21 min Crazy Jae 1,002
6 letter word ...change one letter game (Oct '08) 1 hr say it aint so 28,123
News 15 Weird Weight-Loss Tricks That Work 3 hr St Rick Saintpornum 5
More from around the web