Assuming Evolution is True......

[Tiberius]

I don't see why evolution has to be true in order to ask this question. Given a naturalistic explanation of the universe, changes in intelligence can be a result of non-evolutionary processes. Memes, for example, changes in culture...

 

[Father Heathen]

No opposable thumbs?

They can utilize their trunks.

 

[rusra02]

A supposed "sin" would have absolutely nothing to do with biological evolution. Evolution is happening whether one is doing what is construed as "morally" right or "morally" wrong.

When you say "evolution is happening", what do you mean?

 

[Tiberius]

It's brain size in relation to body size.

 

[Thief]

[/color]

Be cause it is if you continue to refer to said biblical events as a scientific procedure.

And you fail to see the 'surgery'...'cloning'....and 'genetic engineering'?

And what's your point? Observing the procedure itself as well as the outcome is still biology incorrect.

So give the credit to God....and tell Him of His error.

[/color]

Then stop referring to any of it as if any of it has to do with science.

I can't rewrite Genesis for the sake of your argument.

How? How do you take human male DNA and make a woman?

Still harping on the DNA.....well gee.

Ask Moses?...God couldn't tell Moses the details.
Why should you be entitled?

And of course genetic engineering will eventually fall to the hand of Man.
Then you can have your answer.

In the meantime...we have Genesis.
A rib of a man...formed into a woman.....
Sounds very scientific to me.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

When you say "evolution is happening", what do you mean?

This.....
Evolution: Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Dirty Penguin]

And you fail to see the 'surgery'...'cloning'....and 'genetic engineering'?

I did no such thing. I'm simply questioning to reliability of such a claim.

So give the credit to God....and tell Him of His error.

I can't rewrite Genesis for the sake of your argument.

I'm not asking you to. I'm simply informing you that what you refer to as a scientific process by which Adam was cloned but that clone's DNA was modified to produce a female has no bases in science. Even "creationist" disagree with the notion she was a clone.

Shouldn
"I can say with confidence that we know that Eve wasn’t a clone because she was female. She had different sex chromosomes (XX) as opposed to Adam’s XY."

Still harping on the DNA.....well gee.

Yes because you seem oblivious as to how genetics work.

And of course genetic engineering will eventually fall to the hand of Man.
Then you can have your answer.

Your comment makes no sense. Males are XY and females are XX. "God" would have to discard a Y and double the X by "adding" information to make a female. In theory it could work if Adam was XXY but you don't seem to agree with that.

In then meantime...we have Genesis.
A rib of a man...formed into a woman.....
Sounds very scientific to me.

As I've already shown, this is not scientifically possible.

 

[idav]

Actually are brains are shrinking. So no.

It's not the size that counts. Most bees are more intelligent than most humans. Have you ever noticed how many men get lost. Just sayin.

 

[idav]

Assuming Evolution is True, are the human beings in general getting more and more
intellignet or less and less intelligent with the passage of generations? Please support
your argument with concrete reasoning and evidence.

Could go either way really and depends on many many factors. Dumb people can give birth to smart people so there is not telling.

 

[Thief]

[/color]

I did no such thing. I'm simply questioning to reliability of such a claim.

[/color]



[/color]

I'm not asking you to. I'm simply informing you that what you refer to as a scientific process by which Adam was cloned but that clone's DNA was modified to produce a female has no bases in science. Even "creationist" disagree with the notion she was a clone.

Shouldn
"I can say with confidence that we know that Eve wasn’t a clone because she was female. She had different sex chromosomes (XX) as opposed to Adam’s XY."




Yes because you seem oblivious as to how genetics work.



Your comment makes no sense. Males are XY and females are XX. "God" would have to discard a Y and double the X by "adding" information to make a female. In theory it could work if Adam was XXY but you don't seem to agree with that.



As I've already shown, this is not scientifically possible.

And you seem oblivious that God might know a trick or two that science has yet to find.

So what about your dna argument.
Genesis (and God) will be around...so will the bits and pieces you won't deal with.

 

[shawn001]

And you seem oblivious that God might know a trick or two that science has yet to find.

So what about your dna argument.
Genesis (and God) will be around...so will the bits and pieces you won't deal with.

Science has ALREADY proven the first woman did not come from the rib of Adam.

Its also already proven what genome changed from the great apes and humans. genome #2

 

[shawn001]

When you say "evolution is happening", what do you mean?

If Modern Humans Are So Smart, Why Are Our Brains Shrinking?

Here are some leading theories about the why the human brain has been getting smaller since the Stone Age.

If Modern Humans Are So Smart, Why Are Our Brains Shrinking? | Human Evolution | DISCOVER Magazine

 

[rusra02]

This.....
Evolution: Frequently Asked Questions

I thought so... What you call "evolution" is simply the ability of organisms to adapt to their environment. I'm pretty sure the average person doesn't think of insects developing resistance to pesticides as "evolution." I know I don't. They're still the same insects. Most people think of Darwin's theory of evolution, and his claim that all life springs from a single ancestor when the word "evolution" is mentioned.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I thought so... What you call "evolution" is simply the ability of organisms to adapt to their environment. I'm pretty sure the average person doesn't think of insects developing resistance to pesticides as "evolution." I know I don't. They're still the same insects. Most people think of Darwin's theory of evolution, and his claim that all life springs from a single ancestor when the word "evolution" is mentioned.

Hmm...we must all be the same type of single-celled organism then.

 

[Thief]

Science has ALREADY proven the first woman did not come from the rib of Adam.

Its also already proven what genome changed from the great apes and humans. genome #2

And you assuming that the 'rib' is a literal item?
Not a means of describing to an old man of eighty years....
an item he could not understand, and could not relate to his people?

Day Six....Man as a species male and female.

Think God cannot manipulate what He creates?

 

[Jinse]

Why should I assume that it is true when it is actually true? Science is so wonderful.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

And you seem oblivious that God might know a trick or two that science has yet to find.

Oh, so it was "magic" then?

So what about your dna argument.
Genesis (and God) will be around...so will the bits and pieces you won't deal with.

What....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I thought so... What you call "evolution" is simply the ability of organisms to adapt to their environment.

We've already tried to explain this to you on numerous occasions. Adaptation IS Evolution. Evolution is not simply a mechanism of change. Evolution encompasses a number of "Mechanisms" and adaptation is just one of the many, many mechanisms of Evolution.

I'm pretty sure the average person doesn't think of insects developing resistance to pesticides as "evolution." I know I don't.

Well you and the average person would be wrong. The average person is usually clueless as to how evolution works so I wouldn't put much stock in what the "average" person knows or understands. The fact of the matter is...insects that build up a resistance to pesticides pass this resistance on to subsequent generations is exactly what Evolution predicts.

They're still the same insects.

Like I said, you and the average person are ill-informed as to what Evolution says. Of course they're still insects...then again adaptation is also a subset mechanism of speciation. An organism can adapt to exterior pressures (i.e. pesticides) but remain the same species thus remaining sexually compatible with members of the same species or an organism can become a separate species due to environmental changes such as location change, and over time are no longer sexually compatible thus giving rise to a new species.

See: (Speciation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Most people think of Darwin's theory of evolution, and his claim that all life springs from a single ancestor when the word "evolution" is mentioned.

We've come a long way since Darwin but I see nothing wrong with the statement. We know the statement is true giving what we currently know about genetics (ex. Human/Chimp Genome).

 

[Agnostic75]

What you call "evolution" is simply the ability of organisms to adapt to their environment.

Ken Miller, Ph.D., biology, is a devout Roman Catholic. He has an article on the evolution of the flagellum at The Flagellum Unspun. Please critique the article, and state specifically what parts of the article you disagree with, and why?

Consider the following:

Michael Behe, Ph.D., biochemistry, member, Discovery Institute

".......both humans and chimps have a broken copy of a gene that in other mammals helps make vitamin C. ... It's hard to imagine how there could be stronger evidence for common ancestry of chimps and humans. ... Despite some remaining puzzles, there’s no reason to doubt that Darwin had this point right, that all creatures on earth are biological relatives.” The Edge of Evolution

Please state in scientific terms why you believe that Behe is wrong.

 

[shawn001]

Rusra, the reason you people have goosebumps is a part of evolution where humans lost their hair for one.

There are billions of facts that support evolution.

Including 5 mass extintion events where life evolved back.

You claiming evolution isn't true over and over again doesn't change the facts about it and that is it supported by every field of science and proven by molecular DNA studies, which proved it, after Darwin.