• 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!

Evolution couldn't be true

NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
pro4life said:
Hello folks,

I would like to present myself as a person who have studied the idea of evolution from its scientific aspect to the reasoning aspect.
Click to expand...

OK. You asked for it.

Evolution to the laymen is an idea that confers the relationship between the advancement of human specie
Click to expand...

"Confers the relationship?" What could you possibly be trying to say?
"Specie?" Like currency?
"Between the advancement of human specie" Between that ... and what?

... to the more primitive "forefathers". If this was to be true that humans have evolved to a level that totally exceeds other species then we have to study the situation real close.
Click to expand...

What could you even possibly mean by that sort of pseudo-statement? It isn't even clear what you're trying to say!

Study this real close: Human beings aren't evolving to a level that exceeds other species. Evolution isn't a ladder. Evolution doesn't have levels. If the environment changes and humanity dies while the cockroaches live on ... would you still try to frame the discussion by claiming that humanity was somehow "more advanced?"

A specific example I would like to point out is the essential vitamins that humans have to take. Vitamin C for example have to be procured from food since our bodies cannot synthesize such material. On the other hand, rats (more primitive specie), Have the ability to synthesize vitamin C.
Click to expand...

So the ability to synthesize Vitamin C (or not) is somehow a benchmark for advancement? What?

I think its about time we have to distinguish between the idea between adaptation (true) and evolution (false).
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight: You believe that adaptations are "true" while evolution is "false?"

Would you care to explain where "adaptations" come from? And while you're at it, please note that the word adaptation typically implies some sort of change or reaction. Perhaps you'd care to explain how organisms "adapt" over time without also evolving?

...

Whoa. Trying to examine the alleged thought process behind your wretched prose actually ends up doing far more damage than anything I'd have ever tried to do by simply pointing out the flaws in your grammar and diction and calling it a day.

"Your clothes are you. It is not cool to have ****ty clothes. ****ty clothes means a ****ty mind. Thou shalt not have it." ~ Julian Cope ("Look After Your Leathers")

Note: For "clothes" please read "words."
 
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
pro4life said:
Were not in a Shakespearean class.
Click to expand...

Oh. And while we're are it ...

If you were trying to contract "we are," you neglected to include the requisite punctuation.

If you'd like to be understood, please put some effort into making yourself understandable. OK?
 
Bunyip

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
pro4life said:
Evolution is a specie becoming into another specie. A cow becoming a whale. Adaptation is your avg heart rate reducing from 80 to 65 after 3 months of physical conditioning.
Click to expand...

Whales did not evolve from cows buddy. Speciation has been observed many times. It is a fact.
 
Sapiens

Sapiens

Polymathematician
pro4life said:
Evolution is a specie becoming into another specie. A cow becoming a whale. Adaptation is your avg heart rate reducing from 80 to 65 after 3 months of physical conditioning.
Click to expand...
Whales are derived from ungulate stock, so are cows. So whales and cows, way, way back shared a common ancestor. That is not the same thing as your claim of "a cow became a whale," the sort of ignorant statement that only one who is being truculently and intentionally misinformed would make.
 
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
Sapiens said:
No, but in an allegorical fashion they did have a common ancestor.
Click to expand...

“I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history - true or feigned - with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.” ~ J.R.R. Tolkien
 
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
Bunyip said:
They are the same 'kind', both are BMW's. Bugatti is BMW.
Click to expand...

Nay. The Bugatti has a Bugatti logo on it and the BMW has a BMW logo on it. So sayeth The Manufacturer!

...

"The fool has said in his heart, there is no difference between a BMW and a Bugatti." ~ Duetohotroddery 1:60.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top