More News on the Changing Evolution Scene :-) !!! :-)

[Dan From Smithville]

Ah I I hate to be the one to break this to you but. well. Rabbits are vertebrates don't you know.

By the way there is a secret society - The keepers of the holy handbook - who are reported to have some secret yet unreleased fragments of the original bible. One fragment was sneaked out and here is a yet unveiled fragment on creation

"And on the eight day God woke realizing creation was not yet complete. I must create something to have dominion over man for I do not completely trust Adam or Eve who have been eyeing my fruit of knowledge. So God contemplated on the life form to have dominion over man. His voice thundered through the heaven - He shall have large pointy ears to hear everything and a nose that with can discover the unseen, and sharp front teeth to do my will, and a cute fuzzy tail because I like cute fuzzy tails. So on the eight day god made the rabbit and God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. God blessed the eight day and made it holy, And then god was very tired and rested again."

Yeah, but no one has the stones to say it to my face.

Bugs Bunny be praised.

 

[Bear Wild]

It doesn't? Please explain. Maybe I need to hear again what is the theory of evolution. So can you please simplify it in a few sentences without going into the different ages and genetic details? Thanks. In other words, did humans evolve from some Unknown Common Ancestor WITHOUT "divine intervention" according to the theory?
Not to be contentious, that's almost like saying Jesus didn't really exist as written, or -- Moses never existed at all. Or maybe Abraham. Or maybe the 12 tribes. And yes, some say Jesus didn't really exist. Maybe we can go back to Pontius Pilate, too.
Now now -- I'm reading about the difference of imaginative qualities in the brains of humans vs. gorillas. I mean, we have reading, writing, printing presses, computers, guitars, wondering about life, etc. OK, ants may not be able to do things gorillas can do.

Evolution is the theory to explain how live changed over time increasing in diversity and complexity. That simply is the Theory. The science that supports the theory is diverse and incredibly extensive beyond the knowledge of any one of us in the Forum.

Humans evolved like every other organism on the planet and the evidence is unbelievable extensive with no and I mean no other explanation having any evidence other that personal opinion. Evolution - more evidence that you can read in a lifetime. Other explanations a few pages in a book.

What is the real difference between humans and the other apes in our family. Complex Language and even more important written language. Writing, printing, computers, and much of the advances that give us the illusion that humans are "special/different".

So lets look at homo-sapiens IN perspective. The oldest fossils of a homo sapiens is 300,000 years old and by the location it is clear that the origin is much earlier than that.

Now all of those thing you listed about humans started when? The earliest clear writing known is about 4000 years old. The oldest artwork is more difficult to identify with which ape species. For the thing you listed (with the exception of wondering about life which evidence shows that animals have an understanding of life and death) all date after 5000 years ago.
So to be fair in comparing homo sapiens with other apes for the first at least 295,000 years of our approximately 300,000 years you would not have seen much difference between homo sapien and other apes. When you take away all the fancy trappings and clothing we are in reality naked apes.

here is a nice article for you to read.

An Evolutionary Timeline of Homo Sapiens | Science | Smithsonian Magazine

 

[Astrophile]

And you know this because?? you figured it that way? (I really don't believe that any more.) So you may go on claiming what you claim, and that's the way it's going to be right now. So now, by the way, you say animals and plants are descended from a common ancestor. (OK. whatever.)

I looked it up in The Ancestor's Tale by Richard Dawkins; it is in Chapter 36. It's amazing what you can find in books if you are willing to read them.

 

[Wandering Monk]

At least Stephen Jay Gould was honest enough to say, "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.”
(Yup.)

Why are human fossils NEVER found in the same strata as dinosaurs? or any of the dinosaurs predecssors?

 

[metis]

It doesn't? Please explain. Maybe I need to hear again what is the theory of evolution. So can you please simplify it in a few sentences without going into the different ages and genetic details? Thanks.

Basically, the gist of the ToE is that all life forms tend to evolve over time unless they go extinct. All the rest are details.

See: Evolution - Wikipedia

In other words, did humans evolve from some Unknown Common Ancestor WITHOUT "divine intervention" according to the theory?

Since the concept of Divine intervention cannot be proven, nor is it testable, the ToE is totally neutral on this. Most Christian theologians [about 70% the last survey I saw], do believe in God and also accept the basic ToE as long as it is understood that God was behind it all. In my case, the first time I heard that the two are compatible was from a Catholic priest back when I was in high school back in 1962.

BTW, I'm 25 years old.

Now now -- I'm reading about the difference of imaginative qualities in the brains of humans vs. gorillas. I mean, we have reading, writing, printing presses, computers, guitars, wondering about life, etc. OK, ants may not be able to do things gorillas can do.

It's all a matter of degrees as our brain configuration is actually very similar with the biggest difference being the huge size of our cerebrum.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The opinions keep changing. What was certifiably correct (meaning you had to get the 'right answer' on tests to get it marked correct) is no longer necessarily correct. I have learned a lot from these conversations. (Yikes.) Thanks!

I don't understand your point.

Would you rather that science doesn't incorporate new information that is discovered as we go along? What would be the point of that? How would we ever learn anything?

 

[SkepticThinker]

lol, right -- your ancestors did not need a/c, and so that's why you surmise writing was developed only lately? lolol, laughing here...
“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.” (Stephen Jay Gould)

Gould also said this, "It is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists—whether through design or stupidity, I do not know—as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level but are abundant between larger groups. The evolution from reptiles to
mammals . . . is well documented. Yet a pamphlet entitled "Harvard Scientists Agree Evolution Is a Hoax" states: "The facts of punctuated equilibrium, which Gould and Eldredge . . . are forcing Darwinists to swallow fit the picture that [William Jennings] Bryan insisted on and which God has revealed to us in the Bible."


I'm sure if he were here he'd ask you to quit quote mining him.

 

[SkepticThinker]

So again -- you classify yourself as a Christian. And it eludes me as to in what way you declare yourself a Christian, although I am pretty sure that many who claim to be Christian do not really believe the Bible or that Jesus existed, along with you.
So let's figure this -- Jesus declared that God created the first man and woman. Do you reason he was deluded about this or that he fell for a myth about that? I mean we could go on about this, yet you say I "go for the Bible." (Yes, I do, by the way.)
Matthew 19:4, Jesus said: “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’

How do you know what Jesus "declared?"

 

[SkepticThinker]

There is no confusion. I will only say essentially in this post what the Bible says. And the Bible says that Jesus (1) spoke of creation by God, and (2) that he healed the sick and raised the dead. AND Moses had the order of creation even as scientists get it, pretty well in hand.

I guess I have to ask again, why should anyone care what the Bible says? Especially when it comes to matters of science?

 

[SkepticThinker]

The reasonable test is creation itself. While microscopes can uncover many wonderful things, they do not reveal evolution of the Darwinian kind. Romans 1:20 - "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
The Bible does not say that organisms are made up of genetic quality. But it does say that God created the heavens and the earth, without going into detail as to how He did it. And reasonable minds would recognize that each day of creation could be many thousands of years long.

Something isn't a "creation" just because you declare it is. That's a dishonest and fallacious method of argumentation, because you're attempting to simply just smuggle in the thing you're meant to demonstrate.
You need to demonstrate that something was "created" in the first place, before you can start making such declarations.

Also if God has "invisible qualities," how could you possibly know about them?

Apparently the Bible writers had no idea about genetics, which seems weird to me, given that they were supposedly divinely inspired to write these books by the supposed creator of the universe who should definitely know about genetics.

There are a ton of problems with your assertions here.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Good question about time. That is correct about a day's length. There certainly is difference in persons' religious take that it must mean a 24-hour day. It is clear to me, however, that each day of creation was not 24 hours long. To some, they take it that a day must mean 24 hours. I do not. The Bible itself testifies to that thought, that a 'day' can mean different periods of distinct time, not a 24-hour time period. As far as absolute knowledge (I'm sure you didn't mean to insult me, right?), only the Almighty has absolute knowledge along with his Son. Humans, gorillas, bonobos, etc., do not. Have a nice day, I hope the weather is good where you're at.

Why wouldn't your god just make it clear so that everybody could be on the same page with this stuff?
What's with all the ambiguity?

 

[SkepticThinker]

And most atheist that used to be christians were christian for poor reasons. Its pretty much equal.

Most of us were Christian for the same reason most other people are Christians; because we were born into Christian households and raised by Christians.

I do agree that that is a poor reason to believe in something. But then again, I'm one of those people that wants to believe things for good reasons.

 

[SkepticThinker]

hmm. Here's what I said: "So if a person says that there is no god (i.e., 'god' does not exist'), that's a negative statement?
If someone says the sun positively did not come out today, does that mean it's a positive statement? " And the definition of an atheist is by most standards, someone who denies God's existence, OR, put another way, says there is no God. If a person says there is POSITIVELY NO GOD, he is an atheist. Anyway, it's how you look at it, whether it's a negative or positive statement. Especially if he says there is positively no God. Anyway -- either way -- negative or positive. There's no moon out tonight. Positive statement? Negative statement? To say there IS no God -- hmm, is that positive or negative?

Atheists simply lack belief in god(s).

I'm an atheist. You know what I say? I've never been presented with any good reasons to to convince me that god(s) exist, do you have any?

 

[SkepticThinker]

The genetic content wouldn't prove evolution anyway, so can't argue there. Just like you can't "see" God, you can't "see" evolution, either by the genes or by the things around us.
And furthermore -- "When you look at the narrative for hominin origins, it’s just a big mess—there’s no consensus whatsoever,” said Sergio Almécija, a senior research scientist in the Museum’s Division of Anthropology.

Oh, just like the "genetic content" doesn't demonstrate that you're related to your great-great-great-great-grandmother?

Sorry but you're speaking nonsense here.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And you know this because?? you figured it that way? (I really don't believe that any more.) So you may go on claiming what you claim, and that's the way it's going to be right now. So now, by the way, you say animals and plants are descended from a common ancestor. (OK. whatever.)

We know this from utilizing the scientific method to observe, measure and understand what is going on in the world around us.
That's how we know every single thing we currently know about our universe.

 

[YoursTrue]

Atheists simply lack belief in god(s).

I'm an atheist. You know what I say? I've never been presented with any good reasons to to convince me that god(s) exist, do you have any?

Before I even believed in God, I knew I was alive. I know that sounds silly, but I was never in real awe or amazement about life around me. Although I liked music and some other things very much. I thought the Grand Canyon was nice, maybe astounding (I visited it on vacation), I likekd the ocean, I thought, eh -- cruises were ok, some people love them, I'm not eager to go on another one -- I liked certain foods (pizza and Indian food and other foods), but never thought about needing God until I needed Him. it's a long story. I thought, ok, the ocean is nice, natural wonders are interesting, but why am I alive? Where is God because I don't want to die. But I must add that I also did not like life especially as I saw it at the time. Do I still have problems? Yes, the answer is yes. Do I believe in God? Yes, now I do.
Those are not reasons, but I wanted to give you some background. I'll give you a little more of my journey if possible in my next post to you, especially what I found very interesting in my recent Bible reading. (Numbers 23 and Genesis 17:8)

 

[We Never Know]

Before I even believed in God, I knew I was alive. I know that sounds silly, but I was never in real awe or amazement about life around me. Although I liked music and some other things very much. I thought the Grand Canyon was nice, maybe astounding (I visited it on vacation), I likekd the ocean, I thought, eh -- cruises were ok, some people love them, I'm not eager to go on another one -- I liked certain foods (pizza and Indian food and other foods), but never thought about needing God until I needed Him. it's a long story. I thought, ok, the ocean is nice, natural wonders are interesting, but why am I alive? Where is God because I don't want to die. But I must add that I also did not like life especially as I saw it at the time. Do I still have problems? Yes, the answer is yes. Do I believe in God? Yes, now I do.
Those are not reasons, but I wanted to give you some background. I'll give you a little more of my journey if possible in my next post to you, especially what I found very interesting in my recent Bible reading. (Numbers 23 and Genesis 17:8)

Something my grandma(rest her soul) always said....if you don't take time to thank god for all the good times, don't pray to him in the bad times.

 

[YoursTrue]

We know this from utilizing the scientific method to observe, measure and understand what is going on in the world around us.
That's how we know every single thing we currently know about our universe.

and we don't know much...scientists, let's say, astronomers, are in awe of the new things they see. But they didn't make these things, they only discover them. Kind of like underground caves with water that are still being explored. Even the account of the growth of life on the earth seems to be in harmony with natural life. As described in Genesis, first water, then plant life, then animal life -- then humans -- how did the writer know that? He could have figured they all came at the same time. Apparently the account was given to Adam by God his Maker, and he, despite his sin, passed that on to his offspring, and Moses also knew about that. Imagine Adam telling his experience to his children. He knew he was never an infant. (I know I was an infant, but don't remember being born. Yes, I think that's a relevant factor in our understanding of God since He made us that way. Not by evolution, but by the force of life as yes, He initiated.)
But that's not the reason I began to believe in God. Still getting there if we can continue later...
Have a good night.

 

[YoursTrue]

Something my grandma(rest her soul) always said....if you don't take time to thank god for all the good times, don't pray to him in the bad times.

Now I thank Him. Before I believed, I did not thank him for good times, and did not pray when I was going through hardship. But eventually -- He helped me. And now I thank Him, and pray also during hard times.

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh, just like the "genetic content" doesn't demonstrate that you're related to your great-great-great-great-grandmother?

Sorry but you're speaking nonsense here.

I never said that the genetic content does not show I'm not related to my very great grandmother.