Is evolution as crooked as Hillary?

[Evangelicalhumanist]

LOL.
If you're ever really, really bored, go back over my posting history on the topic. I've been an ardent proponent of evolution for more than a decade..
Can't figure out how anyone could miss that...

Deepest apologies -- haven't really been posting here for all that long. I'll try to catch up.

Meantime, I've been noticing lately that I quite enjoy your posts. I'll pay more attention from now on.

 

[Kemosloby]

Again, more demonstration of your ignorance.

Evolution is only a study about life on Earth. It say nothing about life outside the confine of Earth, like everything else in the solar system, Milky Way or the rest of universe.

And likewise, the Big Bang talk of nothing about life, let alone life on Earth. The Big Bang explained how energy and particles formed into matters, like the elements, and then how these matters form into larger matters such as stars and planets.

Both Evolution and the Big Bang focused on different and very specific areas.

Sure astronomers want to know about if life exist in other planets in other star systems in other parts of the galaxies or the universe, but so far we have neither technology or capabilities to study other extraterrestrial life. But astronomy is a large field, which they can work on, while the rest are just theoretical or hypothetical.

Biologists, on the other hand, more frequently focused in area that they can actually investigate...here, on Earth.

And as to making man out of dust.

It is impossible to make a fully-grown living human from dust. Dust is a byproduct waste, not a living matter. Although, our bodies produce wastes, which eventually turn into dust, when the waste decompose, the molecular properties will change from organic into inorganic, hence (when it become dust) it is no longer living matters.

Dust become living human is pure myth, and oversimplification, in which the author(s) had no understanding of physics, chemistry and biology.

Why not lump it all together? Can't have primordial ooze without a big bang. Can't have apes without ooze and can't have humans without apes.

 

[Valjean]

At least we've got who.

Agreed, clearly Brama did it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It was legal. He had no ablitiy to manipulate the tax system. He didn't write the tax law, he just understood it well enough to avoid paying taxes. Probably understands bankruptcy law too by the sounds of it. Smart smart man. What Hillary does is corrupt and illegal but does not go to jail for it. Using her government postion of authority for pay to play, paying protesters to be violent? Lord knows what else she does. We won't since they keep her protected like Catholic priests.

You really think Trump does his own taxes??

 

[Milton Platt]

Just name one thing Evolution theory produces.

The theory explains the evidence. Theories don't and are not supposed to produce anything except understanding. It is the understanding of the evidence and processes that allow us to find uses of the knowledge. Theories evolve over time from hypotheses. To me, your question is nonsensical.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Just name one thing Evolution theory produces.

The theory explains the evidence. Theories don't and are not supposed to produce anything except understanding. It is the understanding of the evidence and processes that allow us to find uses of the knowledge. Theories evolve over time from hypotheses. To me, your question is nonsensical.

What is abundantly clear in Kemo's posts is that nothing is worth anything to him (or her, don't know) unless (s)he gets some direct and tangible benefit from it. Knowledge for the sake of knowledge would be about as useful to such a person as a large bag of rocks is to the diver trying to reach the surface.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

VOA News: "Page does not exist"
Independent: Interesting, birds preceding dinos.
Just the Dromaeosaurids, or all the Therapods?
More dinos from birds than birds from dinos?

http://www.voanews.com/a/scientists-bird-ancestors-likely-not-dinosaurs/1963705.html

Sorry!- I cut off that one last character.- text of article below- But there are many studies along the same lines, by evolutionists, not creationists, you may disagree with them, but again the point being that 'evolution' like 'astrology' or 'climatology' can refer to almost anything, because there are so few fixed points of empirical evidence to anchor anything to.



A fossil found in Inner Mongolia may prove that birds did not evolve from dinosaurs, as many scientists have believed, but from a creature that existed long before.

The Scansoriopteryx, meaning ‘climbing wing,’ could prune the avian evolutionary tree.

Alan Feduccia, biology professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, studied the Scansoriopteryx fossil. What he found was something more birdlike than dinosaur-like.

"It’s just not a dinosaur. In other words, there’s not anything about this creature that allows classifying it as a dinosaur," he said.

His study, with co-author Stephen Czerkas and published in The Journal of Ornithology, points out several birdlike features, particularly the foot.

"It has a perching foot, in which the first toe is rotated to the rear, and this is, of course, a perching foot so we know that it was a perching animal,” Feduccia explained.

Even its hip joint, he points out, does not appear to be built for walking like a therapod dinosaur would.

The evidence, Feduccia says, only adds to the idea that birds did not evolve from ground-dwelling dinosaurs, but from tree-climbing ancestors. It's much easier to take to the air by gliding down from trees, like flying squirrels or gliding possums do. Even bats, that actually fly, do not routinely take off from the ground.

“Every group of flying vertebrates, regardless of the order they come from, all evolved from the trees down," he said. "It’s the simplest mechanism.”

Feduccia notes that Scansoriopteryx defines a new class of creatures completely separate from the dinosaurs and expands our understanding of some of the earliest life forms on earth.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Descent being the operative word, it's what random variation- random corruption of functional design plans would lead to, not ascent - all the way from a single cell to a human being... significant design improvements are a little trickier to account for by blind chance!

 

[Valjean]

http://www.voanews.com/a/scientists-bird-ancestors-likely-not-dinosaurs/1963705.html

Sorry!- I cut off that one last character.- text of article below- But there are many studies along the same lines, by evolutionists, not creationists, you may disagree with them, but again the point being that 'evolution' like 'astrology' or 'climatology' can refer to almost anything, because there are so few fixed points of empirical evidence to anchor anything to.



A fossil found in Inner Mongolia may prove that birds did not evolve from dinosaurs, as many scientists have believed, but from a creature that existed long before.

The Scansoriopteryx, meaning ‘climbing wing,’ could prune the avian evolutionary tree.

Alan Feduccia, biology professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, studied the Scansoriopteryx fossil. What he found was something more birdlike than dinosaur-like.

"It’s just not a dinosaur. In other words, there’s not anything about this creature that allows classifying it as a dinosaur," he said.

His study, with co-author Stephen Czerkas and published in The Journal of Ornithology, points out several birdlike features, particularly the foot.

"It has a perching foot, in which the first toe is rotated to the rear, and this is, of course, a perching foot so we know that it was a perching animal,” Feduccia explained.

Even its hip joint, he points out, does not appear to be built for walking like a therapod dinosaur would.

The evidence, Feduccia says, only adds to the idea that birds did not evolve from ground-dwelling dinosaurs, but from tree-climbing ancestors. It's much easier to take to the air by gliding down from trees, like flying squirrels or gliding possums do. Even bats, that actually fly, do not routinely take off from the ground.

“Every group of flying vertebrates, regardless of the order they come from, all evolved from the trees down," he said. "It’s the simplest mechanism.”

Feduccia notes that Scansoriopteryx defines a new class of creatures completely separate from the dinosaurs and expands our understanding of some of the earliest life forms on earth.

Thanks, Guy. I hadn't heard of this.
I've obviously been slacking in my natural history reading.

 

[gnostic]

At least we've got who.

Getting the who, doesn't explain anything.

Science is all about HOW, not WHO.

It attempts to explain how the world (eg nature) works, and tests their statements (whether that statement be a theory or hypothesis). If you cannot test it, then it isn't science.

Being able to test an explanation is how science objectively demonstrate if the statement is true or false, and not based on assumption and personal belief alone.

 

[gnostic]

Why not lump it all together? Can't have primordial ooze without a big bang.

You are contradicting yourself.

First you accuse science that the universe is made out of "nothing". Now you are saying the universe is made from the "primordial ooze".

If there is "ooze", then it is not "nothing".

Which is it? Something? Or nothing?

And for another, do you want a doctor who specialise in mending broken bones, to learn brain surgery, as well.

And the Big Bang and Evolution are totally different subjects. One is astrophysics and the other is biology.

 

[sayak83]

Thanks, Guy. I hadn't heard of this.
I've obviously been slacking in my natural history reading.

Please see my post here below for context
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/is-evolution-as-crooked-as-hillary.192251/page-5#post-4944530

Its quite clear to anyone who has passing familiarity with the literature as to how decisively the evidence has shifted since the late 1990s for dinosaur-bird evolution hypothesis. But just like static continent and steady state theory, there will be some obstinate holdouts that will only end with a funeral.

 

[Valjean]

Evolution theory used to claim we came from a primordial ooze a quadzillion years after the big bang. Seems evolution theory evolves as much as Hillarys' private server explanations. What gives??

Someone's ruled out the primordial ooze? Why was I not notified?
I've been trying to generate life in a jar of Marmite for months.
Oh, well.

And theories always evolve. Scientific knowledge is always provisional.

 

[Altfish]

Evolution says the universe was created out of nothing, or has that changed now. Big bang theory, or is that just a tv show now? I was just saying if you can believe that why not a man made out of dust? Because there is no God in the big bang theory?

Evolution says absolutely nothing about the creation of the universe. The Big Bang is not evolution.
By invoking God you are just adding another step in the process because it always leads to, "Who created god?"

 

[Ouroboros]

Genetic code limits somethings ability to change as well as enable it. Like the weather, sometimes it gets colder and sometimes it gets warmer but in the grand scheme of things everything remains the same.

Does it now?

Do letters limit the expansion of language? The English language is growing with news words all the time, based on the same bunch of letters. Don't confuse the limits of the nucleotides with the 50 quadrillion possible protein chains they could produce. The truth is, only some 10,000 (if I remember right) proteins are used by Earth life, while the combinations that could be done are millions of times higher.

The key here is that the genetic code does in fact change. And it's the genetic code that determines body shape, life systems, and everything that goes on. When species change or "adapts" they do so with genetic code changing. There's no doubt about this in medicine, genetics, or biology. We know this so well that we even have mapped the genetic code for some species to 100%. Every single gene is mapped what it does, when it's activated, and so on. And if you change a single one of them, it will change the body and/or functions.

 

[Kemosloby]

Does it now?

Do letters limit the expansion of language? The English language is growing with news words all the time, based on the same bunch of letters. Don't confuse the limits of the nucleotides with the 50 quadrillion possible protein chains they could produce. The truth is, only some 10,000 (if I remember right) proteins are used by Earth life, while the combinations that could be done are millions of times higher.

The key here is that the genetic code does in fact change. And it's the genetic code that determines body shape, life systems, and everything that goes on. When species change or "adapts" they do so with genetic code changing. There's no doubt about this in medicine, genetics, or biology. We know this so well that we even have mapped the genetic code for some species to 100%. Every single gene is mapped what it does, when it's activated, and so on. And if you change a single one of them, it will change the body and/or functions.

Well now, that seems like an intelligent design.

 

[Kemosloby]

Evolution says absolutely nothing about the creation of the universe. The Big Bang is not evolution.
By invoking God you are just adding another step in the process because it always leads to, "Who created god?"

Yeah, hey maybe that's what they talk about in heaven.

 

[Kemosloby]

Does it now?

Do letters limit the expansion of language? The English language is growing with news words all the time, based on the same bunch of letters. Don't confuse the limits of the nucleotides with the 50 quadrillion possible protein chains they could produce. The truth is, only some 10,000 (if I remember right) proteins are used by Earth life, while the combinations that could be done are millions of times higher.

The key here is that the genetic code does in fact change. And it's the genetic code that determines body shape, life systems, and everything that goes on. When species change or "adapts" they do so with genetic code changing. There's no doubt about this in medicine, genetics, or biology. We know this so well that we even have mapped the genetic code for some species to 100%. Every single gene is mapped what it does, when it's activated, and so on. And if you change a single one of them, it will change the body and/or functions.

Interesting way to look at it. Language is limited by the ideas words can express. There can be many words for the same idea. Likewise creatures are limited by the purpose they find in the world. The world could have started with a language, when God breathed the breath of life into Adam and gave him understanding. Language changes yet remains the same, whether you speak English, Spanish or Chinese you're still talking about the same things. So too creatures have understanding to fulfill their purpose in the world, those who fulfill the purposes God made, survive to serve God.

 

[metis]

God made man first before taking on the image of man himself as Christ. "Adam was a pattern of the One to come, Christ"

Since when is it all fine and dandy to fabricate disingenuous stories in the name of Jesus and God as you have been doing? If this is what your church is teaching you is morally correct, then let me suggest you actually find a church that at least tries to operate with truth instead of untruths.

I left one of those churches like you probably belong to because they simply were not dealing with reality nor the rather obvious truth. Any religious body that denies what should be common sense, namely that all material things evolve over time and genes are material things, is not based on reality nor truth. The overwhelming evidence clearly shows that there's been an evolutionary process, and to deny that is simply just ignorance on the subject.

If God is Truth, then let me recommend you seek a church that actually teaches it. The basic ToE does not in any way contradict a believe in God as found in the Bible or elsewhere, but my guess based on how you are posting is that your church has lied and told you that it does. Mine did, which is why I left it.

 

[Kemosloby]

Since when is it all fine and dandy to fabricate disingenuous stories in the name of Jesus and God as you have been doing? If this is what your church is teaching you is morally correct, then let me suggest you actually find a church that at least tries to operate with truth instead of untruths.

I left one of those churches like you probably belong to because they simply were not dealing with reality nor the rather obvious truth. Any religious body that denies what should be common sense, namely that all material things evolve over time and genes are material things, is not based on reality nor truth. The overwhelming evidence clearly shows that there's been an evolutionary process, and to deny that is simply just ignorance on the subject.

If God is Truth, then let me recommend you seek a church that actually teaches it. The basic ToE does not in any way contradict a believe in God as found in the Bible or elsewhere, but my guess based on how you are posting is that your church has lied and told you that it does. Mine did, which is why I left it.

Probably no church teaches that Adam was a pattern of the one to come, and the One is Christ. I had to open the scriptures and read them for myself. I do not give in to authoritative bullying but seek the truth myself. Evolution is just authoritative bullying as is a lot of church dogma.

Romans 5:14-15 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.