No. He is correct. Utter nonsense.
-
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!
Does evolution have a purpose?
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
That is you. No evidence for your objections to science. Most of the time your posts are so incoherent it is difficult to tell what you are talking about.
The evidence exists. It keeps mounting up. The theory of evolution is a logically consistent explanation of that evidence. Repeating your mantras of denial does not change that.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I see. And you know this how? because you believe in past evolution leading 'up' to humans and think it's an ongoing thing, humans or something else maybe leading into more advanced (perhaps?) organisms? Who knows? Maybe gorillas and ants, etc., will evolve to something different. Of course the excuse is that we either have not had the time to actually see this, or for a long enough time no big records were kept of gorillas, let's say, evolving into something other than gorillas.
By the way, I was looking at a little video of butterflies getting friendly with a bird in the house. Butterflies have a small brain, wouldn't you say? Birds do, too, not as small as the butterflies. Butterflies do not do the same things as birds. So the question is, what do you think? Did these organisms evolve different from one another? Do their brains think differently? Is one "smarter" than the other?
Yeah, that is true. Every being will evolve further to a new form, just like we went from carts to cars to EVs. The record of change is/will be available in fossils.Maybe gorillas and ants, etc., will evolve to something different. .. or for a long enough time no big records were kept of gorillas, let's say, evolving into something other than gorillas.
Did these organisms evolve different from one another? Do their brains think differently? Is one "smarter" than the other?
Butterflies belong to class 'Insecta', birds belong to class "Aves'. These are two different lineages. Check in Wikipedia.
There is no 'smarter' or 'duller' in evolution. If they are surviving, they are the all suited for their environment. Woolly mammoths were not.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Not sure of that. When you say suited to their environment, could be there was a group of same type animals and an earthquake came along and destroyed that group. Or a meteor knocked them out. Does that mean in your opinion they weren't suited to their environment and so died out by "natural selection"? Men can travel in space with masks. Does that mean they are or not suited to that environment?
So far as written records of humans (the only ones developing writing systems, insofar as I know to record their obserrvations and history), there were for millenia no record of observation of any species moving into another species. (evolving) And while conjectures abound about fossils and lookalikes, still no distinct observations of actual evolution. No distinct direct observation of fossils growing into the next stages. Now if only they had motion pictures during those times. Time video capsules. In progress. Of course there are excuses as to why that is. But anyway, humans are the ONLY ones that have the ability to write down their observations and history. Unlike butterflies and birds. A big -- giant -- leap (gap) from whatever evolutionists say are humans close relatives. A big leap. Big.
Even if only a few percentage points.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Yet butterflies are essential to the environment. So are birds. Butterflies don't live that long, birds live a bit longer, have different qualities, different brain structures.
Whether it was a volcano eruption or a meteorite impact, or global cooling or warming, the fact is that some species can survive the change while others do not.
Yeah, humans are not suited to the environment of space or moon or Mars. That is why they need various contraptions to survive there. It is OK for a group of ten or twenty, but not for a multitude.
Fossils are a distinct, direct proof of evolution. You should not really talk about space or evolution, you are either too ill-informed or too biased about science. Keep to scriptures and to your prophets / sons / messengers / manifestation / mahdis.
At least, here you are correct.
You sure do meander around in your posts.I see. And you know this how? because you believe in past evolution leading 'up' to humans and think it's an ongoing thing, humans or something else maybe leading into more advanced (perhaps?) organisms? Who knows? Maybe gorillas and ants, etc., will evolve to something different. Of course the excuse is that we either have not had the time to actually see this, or for a long enough time no big records were kept of gorillas, let's say, evolving into something other than gorillas.
By the way, I was looking at a little video of butterflies getting friendly with a bird in the house. Butterflies have a small brain, wouldn't you say? Birds do, too, not as small as the butterflies. Butterflies do not do the same things as birds. So the question is, what do you think? Did these organisms evolve different from one another? Do their brains think differently? Is one "smarter" than the other?
Evolutionary trends in modern humans have been noted. They are just not the fantastical leaps that you pretend must happen in order to demonstrate evolution.
Earthquakes and meteors are random events that can overcome selection and go straight to extinction. We do the same thing with bulldozers. It depends on how localized the event and the population is.Not sure of that. When you say suited to their environment, could be there was a group of same type animals and an earthquake came along and destroyed that group. Or a meteor knocked them out. Does that mean in your opinion they weren't suited to their environment and so died out by "natural selection"? Men can travel in space with masks. Does that mean they are or not suited to that environment?
So far as written records of humans (the only ones developing writing systems, insofar as I know to record their obserrvations and history), there were for millenia no record of observation of any species moving into another species. (evolving) And while conjectures abound about fossils and lookalikes, still no distinct observations of actual evolution. No distinct direct observation of fossils growing into the next stages. Now if only they had motion pictures during those times. Time video capsules. In progress. Of course there are excuses as to why that is. But anyway, humans are the ONLY ones that have the ability to write down their observations and history. Unlike butterflies and birds. A big -- giant -- leap (gap) from whatever evolutionists say are humans close relatives. A big leap. Big.
Do you think that people are suited to exist in vacuum?
You are correct. No one has seen a fossil grow into anything. Changes between fossils of different ages over time have been observed.
Do you think that thousands of years ago people were looking for speciation and didn't see it or just had no idea to write observations about it, since they had no concept of it?
There are no excuses for not finding your straw men. There are valid reasons.
Butterflies are invertebrates with brains that you would not even recognize as a brain. Birds are vertebrates and, though smaller, you would recognize it for what it is. Of course, it is much reduced in size and function, since birds need the light weight for flight.
Birds and butterflies have evolved to fill niches in the environment. There are even moths that drink blood. Birds too. A bloody niche was available and some living thing evolved to take advantage of it.
gnostic
The Lost One
Masks?
You mean a complete spacesuit.
A mask won’t do.
The suits have to carry air supply, hence required air tanks, and have to be airtight, to prevent leak, so to keep air in.
In space, because of the vastness of space, there are very little free oxygen and nitrogen. And in space, the most abundant elements are hydrogen, followed by helium.
While we can change the pitch of voice by breathing in little helium trapped by balloon, our bodies weren’t meant to breath in excessive helium. If there are more helium than air in our lungs, we would literally be drowning in helium.
But the suits are also wore to shield the bodies from deadly EM radiation, eg ultraviolet, X-ray, gamma rays, radiation with shorter wavelengths than visible light. These radiation are have high enough energy to dislodge electrons from atoms, hence ionizing the atoms, hence these radiation are known as ionizing radiation.
On the end of the scale in EM spectrum where the wavelengths are longer (eg infrared, radio waves, microwave).
Microwaves are also deadly, because these photons can cause electrons in atoms, excitation - or in another word, to vibrate at very high rates - so literally cooking the inside.
So the suits providing shielding to these EM radiation.
You still don’t understand, what Evolution mean.
Yes, we are ingenious enough to construct ships that fly us (astronauts) in space, or live for longer period in time within space station. And yes, we can wear spacesuits that can shield the bodies from harmful radiations.
But no, our human bodies are not naturally suited for space travel. If our bodies were suited, then we wouldn’t need spacesuit and we wouldn’t need airspace.
And you are forgetting, that frequent and prolonged exposure to little gravity to no gravity, reduced masses in bones and muscles, causing deterioration in both muscles and bones.
If you understand the anatomy of the bones, you would know that the bones aren’t just hard tissues. Inside the bone cavities are the the fatty bone-marrows, and it is these fatty substances that actually produced our blood cells - the white and red blood cells.
The marrows and blood cells are what keep the bones healthy, living and strong. If these marrow dry up, then bones would be dry husk, brittle and more prone to breaking.
Weightlessness can be fun as we float in air, but long period of weightlessness are not good for our health, because the masses within bone be reduced, and the bones become dry and brittle. Hence, the human bodies are not suited in gravity-less environments.
If humans were suited in space, then we would have BUILT-IN “NATURAL PROTECTION”, and we wouldn’t need “artificial protection”.
And as I have tried to explain, artificial protection only produce short-term protection, and have some side-effects that can lead to long-term health problems.
And space travel aren’t the only areas where humans are biologically not suited. For instance, we are not biologically suited underwater. For one, we cannot breath underwater, but we can get around that with air tanks and the mouthpiece. But if we were to naturally live underwater, then we would have gills. Without gills, we are unsuited to live naturally underwater.
Plus, we cannot swim in deeper water without suits designed for depth diving. Water pressures are higher, the deeper the dive. So again, we’re not suited for deep diving.
You are confusing “artificial protection” (eg spacesuits, air tanks) with “natural protection”.
It is the natural (biological) defense that keep life, healthy.
gnostic
The Lost One
You have been here for 4 years now, and you haven’t learned a damn thing about basic biology.
This willful ignorance and your own personal religious belief are blocking you from learning.
Both @Dan From Smithville, @metis and @shunyadragon are theists too, but they have no problems with Evolution.
So the problem isn’t really about religion itself, but your personal belief that getting in the way from learning from your mistakes.
3 years before I joined RF (2006), I was a member of another forum, and I didn’t know anything about Evolution (2003). I heard of words before like “survival of the fittest” and “mutations”, here and there, especially on tv, but never took the time to understand what Evolution really mean, until later in the year (still 2003).
I borrowed my cousin old university textbook, on first year biology, and read some chapters on Evolution. It was much easier to understand Natural Selection than Mutations or Genetic Drift, and it was here that I have first heard of pioneer works on as a background on Natural Selection, by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, and pioneer work in modern genetics by Gregor Mendel. They were all 19th century contemporaries.
Mendel’s genetics weren’t combined with Darwin’s Natural Selection, until the 1930s.
The points are, that I was curious enough to want to learn the basic about Evolution.
But you, you seemed to be stuck in the Dark Ages thinking. It would seem that you wants to wish Evolution to go away, by ignoring the physical evidence of Evolution. You keep making the same mistakes over and over again, thread after thread, year after year, in utter ignorance.
And at your age, that’s sad.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Whenever I am insulted as if others think they're so much "smarter" than I am, or better educated in the way of evolultion, I find it amusing. So -- have a good night as you move along.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
This does not mean that these different organisms came about by means of automatic (yes, automatic) evolution called "natural selection." It means that there are similar characteristics among these organisms. That's what it means.See the similarity between a bird embryo, a Human embryo and a dinosaur embryo; and stop arguing uselessly.
Bird embryo, Human embryo, dinosaur embryo
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Common ancestry of species = genetic fact.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Because he understands how accumulation of micro-changes inevitably results in.
It's demonstrably an ongoing thing. Every new born has a set of mutation that is past on to off spring. And not everybody reproduces.
These inherited mutations accumulate every generation.
1. evolution is not a ladder. so "more advanced" is meaningless
2. all off spring of humans will be humans or sub-species of humans - which will still be humans
If they speciate, it will be into sub-species of gorillas and ants, which will remain gorillas and ants
I lost count on how many times I explained this to you already.
If gorillas evolve into non-gorillas, then evolution theory would be disproven
By the way, I was looking at a little video of butterflies getting friendly with a bird in the house. Butterflies have a small brain, wouldn't you say? Birds do, too, not as small as the butterflies. Butterflies do not do the same things as birds. So the question is, what do you think? Did these organisms evolve different from one another? Do their brains think differently? Is one "smarter" than the other?
I have no clue what you are asking exactly, frankly.
I find it sad that you recognize that there are those that are more knowledgeable and educated in science than you are, yet you continue to scoff at them, dismiss them and insult them while doing your best to make yourself seem the victim.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
She doesn't trust "science" .. she'd rather stick with her beliefs as they are more dear to her than scientific theories.
It doesn't really matter to me HOW G-d created human beings.
I am happy with the fact that He created them.
..and ToE can't disprove that.
eg. ToE can't prove why humans have evolved in the way they have
Last edited:
He is a she.