• 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 Vs. Creationism

Status
Not open for further replies.

McBell

Unbound
fantôme profane;2305595 said:
Are you psychic? Or just playing the odds?

neither.
Just giving him a heads up after reading it myself.

It is as if he has not read a single post in this thread.
 

McBell

Unbound
fantôme profane;2305608 said:
I’m confused, this is post 143, how do you know what post 157 is going to be? Are you a time traveler?

um...
that is an oopsie on my part.
I meant post #137.

Though I wonder if post #157 will fit the bill...
Guess we will have to wait and see if Gloone gets it.....
 

Gloone

Well-Known Member
It takes enormous faith (although bias might actually be a better word) to believe that bacteria capable of eating nylon subproducts were always around, but somehow were never observed actually disgesting the synthetic material for about a decade.

It would be a most extraordinary happening, a supernatural one even. It is not even like finding a dead body that will not decompose; it is far more impressive a feat, comparable to no bodies worldwide decomposing at all for a few years. It just can't reasonably be expected to happen.
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.
Where did the bacteria come from then? How is it a big surprise?

Most of the bacteria that exist hasn’t even been characterized, identified or researched. And according to wiki there is A LOT! “There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass.”

Cars haven’t been around forever either, but the wheel has, and so has other means of transportation.
 
Last edited:

McBell

Unbound
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.
Where did the bacteria come from then? How is it a big surprise?

Most of the bacteria that exist hasn’t even been characterized, identified or researched. And according to wiki there is A LOT! “There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass

Cars haven’t been around forever either, but the wheel has, and so has other means of transportation.

Still grasping in the dark for your god?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Well it happen whether it was expected or not.

I'm afraid that you are still failing at grasping the basics, otherwise you wouldn't make such an out-of-place statement.


Where did the bacteria come from then? How is it a big surprise?

They can only have come through random mutation of pre-existing bacteria.

The surprise is that it was possible for that specific kind of bacteria to develop.

It could well turn out that no amount of time would originate nylon-eating bacteria, but it ended up being in fact possible.


Most of the bacteria that exist hasn’t even been characterized, identified or researched. And according to wiki there is A LOT! “There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass
And that is why it takes a lot of faith to assume that the nylon eaters are not a new breed. There is a lot of bacteria out there, and a lot of nylon indeed. It would take divine intervention for them not to meet if they did exist at the same time.
Cars haven’t been around forever either, but the wheel has, and so has other means of transportation.

So?
 

Gloone

Well-Known Member
I'm afraid that you are still failing at grasping the basics, otherwise you wouldn't make such an out-of-place statement.
That is just your opinion.
Still grasping in the dark for your god?
Just like this is a trolls.
They can only have come through random mutation of pre-existing bacteria.
Yeah that much is understood. They came from pre-existing bacteria.
LuisDantas said:
The surprise is that it was possible for that specific kind of bacteria to develop.
I don’t see how you or anyone else could be an advocate or believer of evolution and find anything a surprise.
LuisDantas said:
It could well turn out that no amount of time would originate nylon-eating bacteria, but it ended up being in fact possible.
Right because nylon never existed until man created it and like I already said in a previous post, nylon hasn’t been around forever.
LuisDantas said:
And that is why it takes a lot of faith to assume that the nylon eaters are not a new breed.
… it came from a pre-existing bacteria like you already said. Faith has nothing to do with it. The only problem is someone wanting to call it a new breed, when it is really just all part of the same Flavobacterium.
LuisDantas said:
It would take divine intervention for them not to meet if they did exist at the same time.
Divine intervention as in it would take a smart, knowledgeable, person, to be aware of what might happen by polluting a pond with toxic waste and turning it into a scum dump. Yeah I agree. I guess trail-and-error is a great way for some people to learn.
 

satori860

New Member
just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION
 

Maury83

Member
LOL
Taking the Bible out of the equasion is really proof that you have never read it.
There are many proofs to the authenticity of the Bible. Various accounts stated in the Bible as "facts" at first rejected from historians and later accepted because of ancient manufacts uncovered some where in the world! There are many ways to prove the Bible's authenticity. So by not considering the Bible you are not considering history and this thread has no firm grounds.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
That is just your opinion.
I wish it were. Unfortunately, it is not.
(...) Yeah that much is understood. They came from pre-existing bacteria.
So it follows that bacteria evolve. Or if you prefer, that not all possible breed of bacteria were created at the same time.
I don’t see how you or anyone else could be an advocate or believer of evolution and find anything a surprise.
Why? Admitting evolution does not grant special powers to anyone. Not every conceivable mutation is necessarily possible. Evolution is, after all, deprived of will and of imagination.
Right because nylon never existed until man created it and like I already said in a previous post, nylon hasn’t been around forever.
Correct.
… it came from a pre-existing bacteria like you already said. Faith has nothing to do with it. The only problem is someone wanting to call it a new breed, when it is really just all part of the same Flavobacterium.
If a breed did not exist previously and exists now, how can it possibly not be new?
Divine intervention as in it would take a smart, knowledgeable, person, to be aware of what might happen by polluting a pond with toxic waste and turning it into a scum dump. Yeah I agree. I guess trail-and-error is a great way for some people to learn.
You are not agreeing with me, because I see no sense in that.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION

Going by that metaphor, just because there are burning ashes today where there was a forest yesterday it doesn't mean there was a fire.

Sorry, but the claim that there is not enough information is that misinformed.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So how do you account for the many contradictions in the Bible, Maury, or the obvious errors?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
LOL
Taking the Bible out of the equasion is really proof that you have never read it.
There are many proofs to the authenticity of the Bible. Various accounts stated in the Bible as "facts" at first rejected from historians and later accepted because of ancient manufacts uncovered some where in the world! There are many ways to prove the Bible's authenticity. So by not considering the Bible you are not considering history and this thread has no firm grounds.

Things are known to exist despite not being mentioned in the Bible, you know.
 

McBell

Unbound
just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION

Sounds more like an attempt to drag Evolution DOWN to the level of creationism.
This thread is about Evolution.
More specifically, the scientific evidence for or against evolution.
 

McBell

Unbound
LOL
Taking the Bible out of the equasion is really proof that you have never read it.
Only in the minds of those who do not understand the scientific method.

There are many proofs to the authenticity of the Bible.
Then start a new and list them.

Various accounts stated in the Bible as "facts" at first rejected from historians and later accepted because of ancient manufacts uncovered some where in the world!
Start a new thread and present your list of unsubstantiated claims in it.

There are many ways to prove the Bible's authenticity.
Again, start another thread.

So by not considering the Bible you are not considering history and this thread has no firm grounds.
If you are unable to discuss the scientific evidence for or against evolution without dragging in the Bible, then thread is not for you.

However, you are free to start what ever threads you like.
 
I think the newly discovered DRD4 (liberal) gene indicates that not only physically, but on a spiritual plane, we are products of natural selection. Societies require morals, and natural selection allows this to happen.
 

Maury83

Member
Ok I get it, you just want to hear what tickles your ears; what suits you the most. I won't take the Bible into account, I ill just consider a few examples of things in nature with details not found in the Bible:
I am an executive chef and I love food.... Let's talk about "Salmon":
In order to breed, many salmon species swim upstream, facing turbulent waters along the way. How are they able to endure a grueling jurney without succumbing to exhaustion?Instead of being overwhelmed by the rough water, these fishe actually take advantage of it. They conserve energy by using vortices, or miniature whirlpools, that form where the water flow is disturbed by rocks, branches, or other objects. As the vortices form on alternating sides of an object, the fish curve their bodies from side to side and glide between the pockets of turbulence. Some schools of fish use the vortices created by the fish swimming in front of them, effectively riding in their wake. The fish can even take advantage of the turbulence created by their own bodies!! Researches hope to borrow from the salmon's efficient swimming style to harvest energy from slow moving water. Traditional hydropower equipment usually generates electricity in water flowing at a rate of 5 knots or faster. Now a prototype using vortex-induced vibrations can generate electricity from water creeping along at 2 knots. The technology, is nowhere near the level of sophistication found in such fish as salmon. Professor Michael Bernitsas of the university of Michigan said "we are not as smart as fish at this point"!
So, the question is: Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed? :) :)
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I think the newly discovered DRD4 (liberal) gene indicates that not only physically, but on a spiritual plane, we are products of natural selection. Societies require morals, and natural selection allows this to happen.

If so, then it is a completely separate matter from biological evolution. Maybe you are refering to the Meme concept.

Either way, do you happen to have a source? I never heard of that gene.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
So, the question is: Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed? :) :)

You are committing the logical fallacy of false dilemma here.

Since when does the Theory of Evolution suggest traits come about entirely by chance?

Have you even studied evolution? And if so, please name three of the text books you used in your study of evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top