I don't know about the rest of you folks, but I sure do.Ark said:
I wonder what could possibly account for it ...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do You Believe that Evolution is True?
- Thread starter croak
- Start date
- Status
I wonder what could possibly account for it ...
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
What JewScout said... evolution is merely a tool. God and evolution are not opposites nor are they mutually exclusive.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
De-evolution is not a word, nor is it a theory. Simply put, de-evolution does not exist.
Neither. Happiness comes and goes by way of evolution.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
But they WERE a great band!
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
how did I show adaptation as regression? Forgive me if I'm cofused, but adapation to UV is an advance as are the genetic changes that promote resistance to disease.
Where is the 'de-evolution'? (and I agree that Devo is a great band :jam: )
wa:do
Where is the 'de-evolution'? (and I agree that Devo is a great band :jam: )
wa:do
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
HelpMe, I understood that you meant 'regression'. My point was that 'evolution' is not always a positive experience. Evolution includes regression, which means that 'negative evolution' or 'regressing evolution' are not scientifically recognized ideas.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I never said that adapting to UV made any one group less human than another so no, I don't think it does negate what I have said earlier. All Humans are still equilly human genetically speaking.
However if we were to completely stop the mixing of the races by say nocking each race down to a few tousand individuals that were completely seperated geographically than given enough time and isolation they may become more distinct. This is of cource impossible and frankly I'm glad for it.
Thus our genepool stays homogenous.
Isolation does not promote 'regression' it promotes change, that change may be for good or for ill but it is change regardless. I see no regression. Please elaborate.
wa:do
However if we were to completely stop the mixing of the races by say nocking each race down to a few tousand individuals that were completely seperated geographically than given enough time and isolation they may become more distinct. This is of cource impossible and frankly I'm glad for it.
Thus our genepool stays homogenous.
Isolation does not promote 'regression' it promotes change, that change may be for good or for ill but it is change regardless. I see no regression. Please elaborate.
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
They did not regress... they had a 'recessive' trait that became dominate. That is not 'regression'.
Many changes are neither good nor bad. Most are a combination of both really. The changes that allow us to hold our heads up high and talk so well also leave us extremely voulnerable to choking. Humans choke much easier and more often than other animals with horizontal heads and smaller vocal cords. Our adaptaions that provide our ability to walk upright also gives us bad backs and flat feet.
They prove, that humans change and adapt. Something that you previously denied.
Survival of the fittest is only part of evolution, it is not the whole process.
wa:do
Many changes are neither good nor bad. Most are a combination of both really. The changes that allow us to hold our heads up high and talk so well also leave us extremely voulnerable to choking. Humans choke much easier and more often than other animals with horizontal heads and smaller vocal cords. Our adaptaions that provide our ability to walk upright also gives us bad backs and flat feet.
They prove, that humans change and adapt. Something that you previously denied.
Survival of the fittest is only part of evolution, it is not the whole process.
wa:do
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
i did not deny that humans adapt(change), i do deny that we evolve.
if we changed from crawlers to walkers, why didn't this supposed evolution also produce stronger backs?try again.
my friends dogs and cats choke more than me, and i only see their pets about 3 hours a week max.
if we changed from crawlers to walkers, why didn't this supposed evolution also produce stronger backs?try again.
my friends dogs and cats choke more than me, and i only see their pets about 3 hours a week max.
perhaps if they had a progressive trait that became dominant it would of been regression?their gene pool regressed, try again.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
what is a progressive trait? I have never heard the term.
traits are either dominate- brown eyes or recessive- blue eyes. Dominate traits often overshadow resessive ones. Thus more people with brown eyes than blue. However if you have two people with the resesive trait than the trait is more likely to appear.
This is why many horrible diseases are caused by recesive-recesive genetic matching.
wa:do
traits are either dominate- brown eyes or recessive- blue eyes. Dominate traits often overshadow resessive ones. Thus more people with brown eyes than blue. However if you have two people with the resesive trait than the trait is more likely to appear.
This is why many horrible diseases are caused by recesive-recesive genetic matching.
wa:do
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Obviously, 'stronger' backs weren't needed. What was needed, was a differently shaped spinal cord, and it did produce that.
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
pah(nice selective choice of definition for adaptation if i don't say so my self)-adaptation-Physiology. The responsive adjustment of a sense organ, such as the eye, to varying conditions, such as light intensity.
a progressive trait is a beneficial one.think "opposable thumbs"
if stronger backs are a problem(as has been claimed), then they were needed.
try again.
a progressive trait is a beneficial one.think "opposable thumbs"
if stronger backs are a problem(as has been claimed), then they were needed.
try again.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
This sentence makes no sense. Obviously, if they had a 'progressive' trait which became dominant, they would not regress.
- Status