RE: Evolution is a Lie?

RE: Evolution is a Lie? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

anthrosub -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:03:17 PM)
Wow...so much to respond to since I left for work this morning. dark~angel, I stated that the creationists I'm speaking of are those who only accept the biblical explanation. In your reply, you start talking about creationists who believe in evolution and go on to tell me how I must prepare to stand up to them by understanding their "theory." You are mixing words and logic. I'm here to talk about "creationists" in the true sense of the word. Yes, because the topic has gone off on tangents, this may not have been clear but now it is. Please...I'm not going to spend time untangling the mental knots you keep introducing into the dialog (like insisting "belief" and "theory" are synonyms). For what it's worth, I hear what you're saying; please demonstrate the same in return. Thank you. quote: I'm an atheist, plain and simple. It's not that I will not believe, I cannot believe. Faith isn't something that I chose or not. It is something I do not have. My life experience has shown me no signs of God in the way that any religion has described him. My life experience has led me to believe that we humans try to put labels on everything and are limited to our very limited perceptions in trying to figure out the great mystery that is our existence. That said, I do respect the perspectives of those who say that they have seen signs of God’s existence. In their perspective, they did. And I’m not pompous enough to consider my perspective superior. Bingo! quote: ...but i am highly dedicated to the belief that early man became so afraid of his own shadow that he is not even matured enough yet, to figure out he is the top of the food chain and there is no such thing as a deity. the moon scared early man and it stuck with him through the eons. but some of us----figured out, it is all a hoax and can stand on our own without needing to depend on a deity to get through life. no fear of man, beast or gods. Essentially on point with what I've been saying. Imagine what it must have been like 10,000 years ago to see a solar eclipse or a comet. Most of the religions today had their origins at a time when people knew next to nothing about the universe. When the bible was in the making, people didn't know of the existence of North or South America, the Arctic, Antarctica, Australia, Southern Africa or the far East (or the Pacific ocean for that matter). Mercnbeth, Evolution has been documented as noted in one of the earlier posts. It hasn't stopped and who's to say where we'll be as a species in another million years (if we last that long). To put things in perspective, dinosaurs died out roughly 65 million years ago after existing for about 160 million years. Homo Sapiens and their ancestors have been around for about 4 million years. Civilization has been around for roughly 10,000 years ( I think some studies suggest closer to 20). Recorded history...5700 years. Pointing to evolution in humans today is like looking at a clock with a "year" hand and wondering why it hasn't moved. The earliest forms of writing date back to 3700 B.C. in what is now Iraq (back then it was called Uruk). Egyptian hieroglyphics followed shortly thereafter. Civilization is generally accepted to have started with the advent of agriculture (which appeared within the same millenia, independent of each other along the Yellow River in China, the Indus Valley in Pakistan, the fertile cresent southeast of the Mediteranean Sea, Central America, and the Andes). For the record, I have a degree in Anthropology from The Catholic University of America (surprise!) and no, I'm not Catholic. I have to say though, it was sure fun watching the professors tiptoe around the the conflicts between science and religion...especially in the philosophy courses I attended (they always stopped at Nietzche). For those who don't know, Nietzche is famous for having said, "God is dead." anthrosub

Lordandmaster -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:05:01 PM)
If you're serious, there are tons of examples. Darwin's famous example had to do with a certain kind of moth that flourished outside some industrial English city. (Yeah, I've forgotten the details.) There were always white and black races of this moth, and at first the white race predominated. But as the soot from this city started to overwhelm the moth's habitat, the black race developed a huge evolutionary advantage. Within decades, they drove the white moths almost completely extinct. I have no idea what the real reference is for this, but it's true, and anyone familiar with the history of science should be able to cite dozens of examples of evolution observable within the past two hundred years. Edited to add (just to piss off the theists): What dumass God would create an appendix? And on what day did He create retroviruses? Lam quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Where is the one example of current evolution?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:12:03 PM)
quote: If I remember my biology, the appendix is assumed to be a left over remenant of out fruit eating days Angel, I think biologists compare it most closely to the gizzard in birds. The theory is that at one time it helped break down the seeds for digestion. But that's all by memory. I'm too far removed from my college biology classes to stand on that as absolute. The purpose of my original post was to point out that the argument against creationism isn't so easy independent of religion. Even for the scientists evolution is still a theory. I was fascinated when I read a recent article concerning the creation/evolution debate that took neither the creation or evolution side. It talked about planetary "seeding" by an alien species though cross genetic breeding and cloning. One of the most interesting aspects considered the cheetah. It is one of the few species that has no evolutionary predecessor found to date. It's skeleton is mostly that of a cat, but it sits like a dog. The flexibility of its spine is neither cat or dog. (The reason it can run 60 MPH) It has the fur of a dog but it's spots are cat hair. Dog-like, it has tough dog pads but it's cat claws are permanently extended like a dogs. Most interesting is that EVERY cheetah has the same DNA. The "smoking gun" for clones. There is a site dedicated to this "theory" if anyone else is interested: http://www.lloydpye.com/ The slide shows on the site document all the anomalies. From this cheetah issue to the fusing of Human DNA. Would this theory be the predominant argument against evolution if religion were not in the picture? Is their a difference in the belief in aliens versus a belief in a god? Or is the concept of "aliens" the logical intellectual evolution of humanity's desire for something greater than self? Does the alien intercession concept merge spiritualist faith with scientific logic? Edited to add a reply to Lam and anthrosub : quote: Lam: But as the soot from this city started to overwhelm the moth's habitat, the black race developed a huge evolutionary advantage. Within decades, they drove the white moths almost completely extinct. This wouldn't be evolution, unless the white moths started producing all black progeny. It would be evidence of natural selection, but not evolution. And forget the retrovirus, as George Carlin asks; "What was he smoking when he created the platypus?" quote: anthrosub: Civilization has been around for roughly 10,000 years ( I think some studies suggest closer to 20). Recorded history...5700 years. Pointing to evolution in humans today is like looking at a clock with a "year" hand and wondering why it hasn't moved. I wanted to be VERY conservative on my documented history. Unfortunately the Conquistadors in South America destroyed much of the writing of the Aztec's, Inca's and other indigenous cultures because it contradicted "church dogma" or we may have a much greater reference base. As an Anthropologist, does the evolutionary theory fit in the fixed time alloted for it? Even with all the millions of years of earth history can all the branches of all the species be accounted in the time allocated assuming they all have a common primordial ooze common history? Do you subscribe in the theory that the evolution of the dinosaur can be seen in current bird species. I recall a program comparing the fossilized impressions of a dinosaur footprints in a walking gate with that of a current day ostrich. Two of my favorite Nietzsche quotes: "All truth is simple... is that not doubly a lie?" and "Faith: not wanting to know what is true." I have reason to hope that this quote of his is also correct; "In heaven, all the interesting people are missing."

anthrosub -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:15:08 PM)
LOL. I was going to cite that example but decided against it to keep my long posts from becoming short novels. The moths that weren't born darker were easier to spot by birds and eaten (no camouflage), leaving only the darker moths to procreate. The same thing happened in reverse once the soot levels dropped. anthrosub

Raphael -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:23:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: perverseangelic I think that many, many people who "don't believe" in evolution don't understand what evolution really is. I know that's true. There's a man who I think is very intelligent, and I respect deeply, but he is in that group. He likes to argue about it, only there's no point - every argument he puts forward is completely irrelevant, because it's all based on a false idea of what evolution entails, and he absolutely cannot seem to grasp that fact. So whenever he gets on the subject, I just try to tune out now... there's just no point. I think a lot of anti-evolution folk are like that, because when I see their arguments, I see some of the same ones.

anthrosub -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:24:26 PM)
That's very interesting and I'm going to check it out. My first reaction to the Cheetah details is maybe it's ancestors were left behind in South America once it split from Africa. The cats in South America are very different from the cats in Africa (and some have spots). I think it's a given that life exists elsewhere. The universe is simply too big for there not to be. I don't say this because I need something greater than self but because I think it's arrogant to claim life only exists on earth. anthrosub

Mercnbeth -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 2:41:37 PM)
quote: I think it's a given that life exists elsewhere. The universe is simply too big for there not to be. I don't say this because I need something greater than self but because I think it's arrogant to claim life only exists on earth. anthrosub Damn you are too quick and I'm enjoying the hell out of this discussion. I already edited a prior post to add a question or two for you. I want to tap into your background if you don't mind. I also have the arrogance attitude regarding life outside earth. I really don't know why life on another planet would be so bad for any religion either? Can someone explain why life on another planet be such an attack on religion, Christianity in particular? A pre-response thanks too!

pleasureforHim -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:03:56 PM)
Part of the fun of being Catholic is the ridiculous side if it. After Vatican II (i think) they did away with pleniary indulgences - a way to buy a persion condemned to hell into heaven with filthy lucre. LOL. Our history is ridddled with some of Man's greatest sins..and yet we are supposedly the One True Church; the only Way. (i always wondered about the billions in india and china,..were they just object lessons in how lucky we were to be Catholic?) But it is my tribe..my spritual home..the place i feel closet to God on Sundays..and i have learned to accept its follies just as i would accept the follies of a madien aunt with a touch of alzheimers. Faith is in your heart..not your head. i feel solace there..and that's enough for me. And can we lay off the Catholic bashing just a tad? Surely there's another rekigion to ridicule? pleasureforHIm

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:05:30 PM)
quote: I'm here to talk about "creationists" in the true sense of the word Ok - can't resist - I am gonna do a Merc and ask if the true is the same as real... runs away from any swatting verrrreee fast

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:10:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster If you're serious, there are tons of examples. Darwin's famous example had to do with a certain kind of moth that flourished outside some industrial English city. (Yeah, I've forgotten the details.) There were always white and black races of this moth, and at first the white race predominated. But as the soot from this city started to overwhelm the moth's habitat, the black race developed a huge evolutionary advantage. Within decades, they drove the white moths almost completely extinct. I have no idea what the real reference is for this, but it's true, and anyone familiar with the history of science should be able to cite dozens of examples of evolution observable within the past two hundred years. Edited to add (just to piss off the theists): What dumass God would create an appendix? And on what day did He create retroviruses? Lam quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Where is the one example of current evolution? quote: quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Where is the one example of current evolution? OK - now I do remember that there is a really recent (as in the past 6 months) example of evolution, but I can't for the life of me find it or remember what it was! Demon, I believe, knows - and when He returns from His trip, I am sure He will add Merc. Peace and Love

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:14:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth The purpose of my original post was to point out that the argument against creationism isn't so easy independent of religion. Even for the scientists evolution is still a theory. I was fascinated when I read a recent article concerning the creation/evolution debate that took neither the creation or evolution side. It talked about planetary "seeding" by an alien species though cross genetic breeding and cloning. One of the most interesting aspects considered the cheetah. It is one of the few species that has no evolutionary predecessor found to date. It's skeleton is mostly that of a cat, but it sits like a dog. The flexibility of its spine is neither cat or dog. (The reason it can run 60 MPH) It has the fur of a dog but it's spots are cat hair. Dog-like, it has tough dog pads but it's cat claws are permanently extended like a dogs. Most interesting is that EVERY cheetah has the same DNA. The "smoking gun" for clones. Actually - the planetary 'seeding' theory has it's merits. I would conclude (only my own thesis btw - to be taken with a pinch of salt) would be that if aliens have bred and cloned themselves, for example to create humans, then we as a race would have the coding that would allow us to clone as well eventually - something that is happening today. Kind of - a clones, clone, cloning. Peace and Love

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:18:55 PM)
quote: I also have the arrogance attitude regarding life outside earth. I really don't know why life on another planet would be so bad for any religion either? Can someone explain why life on another planet be such an attack on religion, Christianity in particular? I do not believe that life on another planet is as far fetched as some may believe, as a christian - perfectly possible. Bit of a discussion killer, hey... sorry Merc. Peace and Love

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:31:06 PM)
fille, - I am assuming(maybe wrongly) that you just clicked my post and that your comment isnt directed to me - Merc - didn't you know? It wasn't what He was smoking, but that the platypus was Gods 'fuck you ' to Darwin? [sm=lol.gif] Peace and Love

Mercnbeth -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:31:27 PM)
quote: I do not believe that life on another planet is as far fetched as some may believe, as a christian - perfectly possible. Bit of a discussion killer, hey... sorry Merc. Angel~ Not at all, I was recalling the issues of when the Martian rock discovered in Antarctica may have had fossilized bacteria embedded. I remember the creationists scrambling to explain it, but I never understood why they should have a problem with it. There argument was interesting. They said that it was a rock that was launched off the Earth due to meteoric impact, landed on Mars, was blown away from Mars due to another meteor impact and then landed on Earth. Therefore it wasn't Martian bacteria but just a interplanetary traveling bacteria launched by co-incidental meteor strikes. And I don't even think they were Catholics.

darkinshadows -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:35:05 PM)
ooo.. I am going to have to google for articles... Peace and Love

anthrosub -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 3:38:32 PM)
Thanks! I'm glad you're enjoying the ride. The problem with life on other planets for religion (in my view) would be a function of what the specific religion claims to begin with. One thing about Christinity that I've noticed is it sort of painted itself into a corner by telling a story of creation. As time passed and knowledge grew, the church has had to deal (reluctantly) with conflicts when they became so obvious to everyone that it would lose credibility if it didn't. Galileo showing that the earth is not the center of the universe is a good example and I find it telling that it took what, 300 years for the church to finally reverse his ex-communication? If aliens were to land in Central Park tomorrow, you can bet the Pope would be scrambling with a new proclamation to officially recognize that god's domain embraces all life, no matter where it's found. It would be very interesting to see how they reconcile the story of creation with life from another world. But until then I don't think they will give it a second thought. Background... I decided to remove my background description. After posting, I started getting an uneasy feeling about what I had to say and how it might be taken. I'm not very successful on the social front at times, so I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to anyone who might have been put off reading it. anthrosub

Mercnbeth -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 4:20:12 PM)
quote: ~Angel~: ...google for articles... Angel~ I found it in my extensive collection of "articles of interest". My chronic need to pursue information on the trivial, banal, and inconsequential is an addiction. Now with computers it's become an obsession. This comes from about 1/3 of the way down in this article: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2001/0302mars_life.asp quote: Therefore if this report does turn out to be genuine evidence for life on Mars, this life couldn't’t have begun there. Rather, it may be Earth life that was somehow transported to Mars. After all, if we grant that the ALH84001 meteorite found its way to Earth from Mars, then it’s hardly impossible for things to be transported out of Earth as well. A violent meteoritic impact could conceivably knock material out, with a speed exceeding escape velocity. Or spores could be carried so high up that the solar wind could move them, and this would be in the right direction to Mars.

anthrosub -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 4:25:08 PM)
A bit from a book occurred to me and I thought I'd post the passage since it seems relevant. It's from a book I consider to be one of the most significant pieces of work in the past 100 years. From "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert Pirsig "We take a handful of sand from the endless landscape of awareness and call that handful of sand the world ... Once we have the handful of sand, the world of which we are conscious, a process of discrimination goes to work on it ... We divide the sand into parts. This and that. Here and there. Black and white. Now and then. The discrimination is the division of the conscious universe into parts. The handful of sand looks uniform at first, but the longer we look at it the more diverse we find it to be. Each grain of sand is different. No two are alike. Some are similar in one way, some are similar in another way, and we can form the sand into separate piles on the basis of this similarity and dissimilarity. Shades of color in different piles—sizes in different piles—grain shapes in different piles—subtypes of grain shapes in different piles—grades of opacity in different piles—and so on, and on, and on. You'd think the process of subdivison and classification would come to an end somewhere, but it doesn't. It just goes on and on. Classical understanding is concerned with the piles and the basis for sorting and interrelating them. Romantic understanding is directed toward the handful of sand before the sorting begins. Both are valid ways of looking at the world although irreconcilable with each other. What has become an urgent necessity is a way of looking at the world that does violence to neither of these two kinds of understanding and unites them into one. Such an understanding would not reject sand-sorting or contemplation of unsorted sand for its own sake. Such an understanding will instead seek to direct attention to the endless landscape from which the sand is taken..." anthrosub

Lordandmaster -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 5:19:36 PM)
Actually I just realized that the emergence of drug-resistant bacteria is a perfect example of observable evolution.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Evolution is a Lie? (7/5/2005 6:58:23 PM)
quote: the emergence of drug-resistant bacteria is a perfect example of observable evolution. Accelerated evolution at that.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625