we are F--ed

[RRfireblade]

The fact that Darwins Evo Theory has large holes is not exactly "News".

But thanks for the recap.

[Cryer]

I say bring it on. Let me get a few more paintball games in, but bring it on.

We all gotta go somehow, dont we?

I think I want to be playing a tournie when it happens. Then when everyone else is distracted, I'll bunker everyone and hang the flag.

Originally posted by PyRo
Anyone else up for looting when this happens?

I'm down. Meet me at the NPS Distribution center

[Cryer]

and ya...


Darwin was drunk.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by Trigger_Happy
What is with this evolution crap?

lol...god probably made us then.

i think i'll stick with darwin...and you can't really argue that something is not true without providing a substitute explanation. i mean you can obviously (and you did), but it leaves us with nothing. i would say go with the lesser of two evils, and say there is no such thing as god, and that darwin was right. see, by just disproving something and not substituting it with something else, you give no compelling reason for the person to change their beliefs.

[Trigger_Happy]

Since you didn't BS me up an answer about something we don't know about, I'm gonna believe that old dude's disproven BS, okay?

Sorry to misquote you, there, but that's some of the owrst reasoning imaginable! I did give you an alternative to evolution: Square one. Yeah, just admit that we don't know. It generally works better than pretending to know all the answers while educated people can clearly see that you don't have a clue.

[spantol]

In the future, I strongly suggest that you follow the advice given in your sig.

First off, Darwin's Natural Selection encompassed a mechanism for evolution, not evolution itself. The concept of evolution had been around for quite awhile. Further, while I have little doubt that data exists that might be interpretted as evidence against evolution, you have spectacularly failed to provide any.

You have claimed that the fossil record is spotty, so it should not be used to prove anything. You then cite this as evidence against evolution.

You have claimed that since many mammals have similar bone structures, all animals would necessarily have to have similar bone structures for a common ancestor to have existed. You have provided no evidence for such a broad claim. The concept of speciation can explain why such diversity exists.

Your molecular biology example is at best over-simplified, and at worst flat out wrong. There's at most a 10% difference in the DNA of all species, of all life on this planet. There's about a 5% difference between humans and chimps.

You go on to "debunk" punctuated equilibrium, failing to note that PE was proposed, like Natural Selection, as merely a mechanism for evolution, not a catch-all description of the concept writ-large. This particular mechanism requires periods of environmental instability, not necessarily "intense toxic chemical or radiation exposure."

In short, you've presented a poorly-informed attack on two proposed mechanisms of evolution, stopping periodically to claim that everything you've presented is true. This is called Proof By Repeated Assertion, and isn't exactly a valid form of inference.

While it's true that we don't have all of the answers, we do have a compelling, well-supported scientific theory. We've observed speciation. We have a fossil record, from which we can clearly observe adaptive changes to organisms over time. What more do you want?

Originally posted by Trigger_Happy
Please do us all a favor and start back at square one in your minds. We have no idea where we came from, and have no known way of finding out.

[Trigger_Happy]

I want:

To know what fossil record you speak of

And to inform you that I used structural homology as an example because evolutionists did first. If it's good enought for you, it's good enough for me.

I also want to point out I said the fossil record offered no proof, and then went on to show that even that 5% was not valid.

Your version of molecular biology is simply not true. We vary much or little from other creatures seeminly at random. For instance, the Rhesus Monkey only differs 1% from humans. This was widely touted as amazing proof. Still, any assortment of random organisms will fail to fall in order from "simple" to "complex".

So while you say you have a compelling theory, I have yet to see it.

[dansim]

i belive in evolution, because we all had to come from somewhere, there wasn't two(one in some cases) of every species all of a sudden on the planet

[spantol]

Here's a primer:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

And here's some stuff specifically on Macroevolution:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And here are some examples of transitional fossils in the fossil record:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

And here's a quick debunking of your claim that all mutations are harmful:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB101.html

Originally posted by Trigger_Happy


So while you say you have a compelling theory, I have yet to see it.

[SlartyBartFast]

Please do us all a favor and start back at square one in your minds. We have no idea where we came from, and have no known way of finding out.

That is possible the most ignorant and stupid thing ever posted. Stay ignorant, impossible to learn.

Go live in a cave.

I did give you an alternative to evolution: Square one.

Here's the problem bub. The belief in Christianity is predated by centuries of other belief. It isn't "square one".

Your belief in your books and rituals is no more proven or founded than the hundred and more other long dated belief systems. I won't argue with you over that fact, because I know you'll refuse to see the validity of other beliefs. Although you have absolutely no basis for you positio other than what has been repeated to you.

This is called Proof By Repeated Assertion, and isn't exactly a valid form of inference.

I just wasted my time writing a long post against the stupid belief of Mayans and Egyptians fortelling the future. I'll leave this thread to you.

You can repeat the Bible all you want. Doesn't make it any more or less true. Just what you believe.

Even the Pope agrees that theology and scientific theory (including evolution) can coexist.

[bofh]

Holy thread necromancy!

/OH NOES the Mayan's calendar ends!

[stop whining buy a mag]

Here's a primer:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

And here's some stuff specifically on Macroevolution:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And here are some examples of transitional fossils in the fossil record:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

And here's a quick debunking of your claim that all mutations are harmful:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB101.html

I'm guessing you have a major in some science related background. You seem to have double the IQ of my biology teacher.

Even though this is turning into another religion thread, I'll say that I'd first believe in Buddhism over Christianity. Every single religion that came after the first/correct one has to be just an arguement for someone to get rich/famous/be worshipped out of.

If you look a little further into all the DNA mumble jumble you'll see that it makes more sense. While a fruit fly has half the number of genes as us, ours work differently and produce many more protiens making our body more complex.

I hope spantol can get more in before this thread closes. He now competes with Lohman for the smartest person on AO award.

[Rhandhali]

http://www.exitmundi.nl/exitmundi.htm

Great bedtime stories.

[tropical_fishy]

OKAY. SO. RECAP.

1) Evolution? Definitely not.
2) "Myan" Calendar? HERESY! HERESY!
3) Christianity/creationism? Very yes! In fact, the Bible PROVES that the Earth isn't billions of years old. In fact, fossils were a government ploy to secularize the world.
4) End of the world? The Rapture is coming! The Rapture is coming!



Let me be the first in this thread to pass out the tinfoil hats.

PS-- Lohmann ain't so smaht, just loquacious

[SCpoloRicker]

I'm compelled to enter this thread. I don't know why.

SBF: seriously, whats with the ressurect? A newer member started a Creationalism/ID thread a few days ago and it got locked in a few hours.

I'm all for good fun and all, but its a lopsided case, and pointing out said obviousness always gets folks riled up.

/howdy gang
// I work for an Intelligent Designer, so I'm really getting a kick out of a lot of these replies.