painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I beg to differ.
wa:do
-
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!
Question for people that believe in evolution
- Thread starter ftv1975
- Start date
wa:do
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Um....ok. Thanks for your opinion?
logicalthought123
Faithless-- Rush
I have long been facinated with evolution, ever since I saw the movie Evolution I realize that sounds stupid. After I saw that movie I began to research evolution but it wasn't until three years ago that I fully understood the concept. I'm not saying I know close to everything about evolution, I don't, but I feel like I have a good grasp on it.
One thing that has always been a strong example to me is: Snakes and Whales. Both are animals that don't have hind legs, in snakes case front legs either, (whales tails are not hind legs). But if you look at their skeletons they both have a spot on their spines where legs were once attatched. This indicates that at one point whales and snakes could walk, now they can't.
Another example more related to people is: highlanders. They are begining to be born with larger lungs than most people, and Anthropolgists believe that in a couple thousand years (that's how long it takes) they will actually be an entirely different species of human.
One thing that has always been a strong example to me is: Snakes and Whales. Both are animals that don't have hind legs, in snakes case front legs either, (whales tails are not hind legs). But if you look at their skeletons they both have a spot on their spines where legs were once attatched. This indicates that at one point whales and snakes could walk, now they can't.
Another example more related to people is: highlanders. They are begining to be born with larger lungs than most people, and Anthropolgists believe that in a couple thousand years (that's how long it takes) they will actually be an entirely different species of human.
Malleus_de_Philosophia
Member
There's a stronger form of evidence in addition to speculating on the anatomy, and that is experimenting with embryos of snakes and reptiles. Research has shown that there are 3 Hox genes in common: HoxB5, HoxC6 and HoxC8. The difference is however that in snakes, all 3 Hox genes express throughout the spine but in reptiles, HoxB5 is expressed in a larger part than HoxC6 and HoxC8. The end result is by genetic manipulation, one can have snake embryos with legs or reptiles embryos without legs. We have a diagram in one of our lecture notes neatly showing this but instead of sending the lecture notes, I found a nice PDF article that explains what I'm referring to, although it gives a diagram comparing the snake embryo with a chick embryo, which isn't what I wanted but when I find the picture. http://people.biology.ufl.edu/mjcohn/Pubs/Develimbn.pdf. If you want a more detailed article, it's about 30 pages and I haven't read all of it but it does go into plenty of depth from what I read so far: http://people.biology.ufl.edu/mjcohn/Pubs/Polly_Head_Cohn_2001.pdf. For whales, this article provides a molecular and evolutionary view on it: http://whitelab.biology.dal.ca/lb/Bejder and Hall.pdf.
I haven't heard of this before, do you have sources of this?
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
The patterns of development of FVC, FEV and %FEV are examined in 217 male and 195 female youths of Aymara ancestry residing in La Paz, Bolivia (altitude 3600 m). The data provide some evidence of an acceleration in the development of lung function relative to stature in Aymara children, beginning during early adolescence, and also indicate that there is a strong relationship between lung function and chest dimensions in Aymara children. Similar patterns have been observed among Quechua youth. However, despite the general similarity between Quechua and Aymara youths in the development of lung function, there are potentially important differences between them. In particular, the magnitude of the acceleration of lung volumes relative to stature among Aymara children appears to be considerably less than is exhibited by highland Quechua children. In addition, shorter Quechua boys have FVC values similar to those of shorter Aymara boys, despite having significantly larger chests, while taller Quechua boys have considerably larger FVC values than taller Aymara boys, without a corresponding increase in chest size relative to stature. Thus, although lung volumes and chest dimensions are closely related in both groups, the development of lung function to chest size of Quechua boys appears to be somewhat different from that of Aymara boys and, in particular, to be amplified during adolescence in response to factors other than simply an increase in chest size.
Annals of Human Biology
1987, Vol. 14, No. 6, Pages 533-542 , DOI 10.1080/03014468700009371
Malleus_de_Philosophia
Member
This isn't evidence that the given population of humans will become another species, it simply shows that within the species of humans, two groups have some differences.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Agreed. I was just noting where he might have gotten the idea from.
APW
Member
Good Evening:
Hi, Al here... I am new to the forum.
The comment I would like to address is:
All I've ever seen from those who say things like "evolution adds to my belief in God" is vague, warm-fuzzy, feel-good platitudes that even a cursory examination shows to be empty. From my perspective, it looks like someone telling themselves, "I really need to believe this, so I'm going to no matter what".
My belief in evolution adds to my belief in God. I have no trouble in putting God and evolution in the same sentence. Now, there are many people who have difficulty with this concept. They rightly state that billions of years is a long time to wait for the production of a single race of God knowing individuals on a lone planet lost in an otherwise empty universe.
But I see things somewhat differently. For what if this was not the only inhabited world in the universe? What if it were only one of millions, or billions of inhabited worlds? And what if each of these worlds had the possibility of producing a race which could also know God. Then, and only then, (at least in my opinion) would there be a sound basis believing that evolution and God are connected in some manner.
Now, I am not gonna tell you that I have ever been in contact with beings from another world, or another plane of existence. Because I have not. But, having seen the recent advances of science, like the Hubble Deep Field image (check it out on u-tube if you have not already seen it), I can not imagine that we are alone in the universe. And if God is responsible for the humanity of the human race, then should he not also be responsible for all the beings of a far flung universe???
Al
Hi, Al here... I am new to the forum.
The comment I would like to address is:
All I've ever seen from those who say things like "evolution adds to my belief in God" is vague, warm-fuzzy, feel-good platitudes that even a cursory examination shows to be empty. From my perspective, it looks like someone telling themselves, "I really need to believe this, so I'm going to no matter what".
My belief in evolution adds to my belief in God. I have no trouble in putting God and evolution in the same sentence. Now, there are many people who have difficulty with this concept. They rightly state that billions of years is a long time to wait for the production of a single race of God knowing individuals on a lone planet lost in an otherwise empty universe.
But I see things somewhat differently. For what if this was not the only inhabited world in the universe? What if it were only one of millions, or billions of inhabited worlds? And what if each of these worlds had the possibility of producing a race which could also know God. Then, and only then, (at least in my opinion) would there be a sound basis believing that evolution and God are connected in some manner.
Now, I am not gonna tell you that I have ever been in contact with beings from another world, or another plane of existence. Because I have not. But, having seen the recent advances of science, like the Hubble Deep Field image (check it out on u-tube if you have not already seen it), I can not imagine that we are alone in the universe. And if God is responsible for the humanity of the human race, then should he not also be responsible for all the beings of a far flung universe???
Al
xkatz
Well-Known Member
johnhanks
Well-Known Member
The fact that everything we observe about living organisms points to it having happened: the fossil record, geographical distribution, chromosomal and DNA evidence, hierarchical classification, comparative anatomy, comparative physiology and biochemistry, embryology - the lot. Everything we see in biology is wholly consistent with evolution, and highly inconsistent with special creation.
APW
Member
Jose Fly asked:
"The question then is, what role does this god play in the evolutionary process? Does it intervene or guide evolution to desired ends? Or does it set up the rules at the beginning and sit back and watch it all unfold?"
　
Wow! I’m not sure I can even begin to answer that question with anything approaching authority! So I guess I’ll wing it. So please understand that this is merely my opinion.
I guess I think that god is the creator of the universe. Looking at the size of the universe I suspect that there are many world similar to our own. So rather than thinking that god is busy controlling each and every act of every being in the universe, I believe that god knows the end from the beginning.
But does that mean that I think that we are controlled each step of the way? Not at all. I think that among the reasons why god created the universe was, to escape from that all-inclusive FINALITY of existence. I see us as evolving, each in our own unique way, to fulfill another side of god. The experiential side. After all, if there does exist a being who is all-replete in experience, then this being cannot gain new experience. The god I conceive of was before time and will be after time. Therefore I think that we exist in order to complete a universe of experience. And that this universe will eventually become manifest in another portrayal of the same god who is a father to all of mankind.
"The question then is, what role does this god play in the evolutionary process? Does it intervene or guide evolution to desired ends? Or does it set up the rules at the beginning and sit back and watch it all unfold?"
　
Wow! I’m not sure I can even begin to answer that question with anything approaching authority! So I guess I’ll wing it. So please understand that this is merely my opinion.
I guess I think that god is the creator of the universe. Looking at the size of the universe I suspect that there are many world similar to our own. So rather than thinking that god is busy controlling each and every act of every being in the universe, I believe that god knows the end from the beginning.
But does that mean that I think that we are controlled each step of the way? Not at all. I think that among the reasons why god created the universe was, to escape from that all-inclusive FINALITY of existence. I see us as evolving, each in our own unique way, to fulfill another side of god. The experiential side. After all, if there does exist a being who is all-replete in experience, then this being cannot gain new experience. The god I conceive of was before time and will be after time. Therefore I think that we exist in order to complete a universe of experience. And that this universe will eventually become manifest in another portrayal of the same god who is a father to all of mankind.
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
What about during time? I haven't seen him around here lately.
Malleus_de_Philosophia
Member
This seems a bit puzzling to me. If god knows what will happen, then there are two possible reasons why. First, god controlled the events so he knows what happens. How he controlled the events can vary but isn't really important now. Second, god didn't control any of the events but knows based on every single possibility what the future will hold with precise details. To me, the first option seems much more likely because how can one know the future in such great detail by tracing the exact path of each event where the factors involved are uncontrolled as are the participants? When we apply this thinking to one's entire life, one has to wonder, how can god know what career we will each have and how can he know what the outcome will be of every single step of the way without having any control over it? Other than giving the over-used answer of "he's god, he can do that sort of stuff", I'm referring to which of the two possible options above are the reason why.
So we evolve in order to fulfill an aspect of god where god cannot gain anything new? One question: why?
I've had a debate with others about this and there seems to always end in us agreeing yet somehow in some odd way still disagreeing. The argument from my side goes as follows: if time is infinite and if god is infinite, how do we know god's infinity is greater than time's infinity? Infinity represents some extraordinarily large quantity beyond the finite limits of the given context but either way, the infinite amount is unknown. When one asserts that god's infinity is greater than time's infinity, then one automatically knows the relative number the infinities of each are or else how could they make their assertion? This then leads to a questioning of is the infinite amounts we spoke of earlier really infinite? Either way, the end result of the argument from my side is that your side cannot have any reasonable argument because there are 3 possible results: time's infinity = god's infinity, time's infinity > god's infinity or time's infinity < god's infinity. The point is, one cannot reasonably argue for any one of these 3 without disproving the other 2.
The argument I've received a few times include biblical passages or other holy text passages but I want to say now that those are irrelevant and hold no place in this specific argument for 2 reasons. First, this argument is based on mathematics, not on religious texts. Second, this argument assumes that god is real and that god is infinite. Any other properties of god and any other holy text passages are irrelevant.
I'm not really understanding you here. If god cannot experience anything new and if we live to fulfill god's experiences or complete the universe of experience, then how does that work without contradicting itself?
DallasApple
Depends Upon My Mood..
In his defense I dont think he claimed he "saw him"..he said "percieved" him.(excuse me "concieve)
Love
Dallas
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
My mistake. In any case, I haven't conceived of him much either, lately.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
That's fine. I'm not aware of anyone who can speak about gods with real authority.
Ok, so this god does not intervene, but set up the rules and let the universe run on its own, correct?
So the point of the evolutionary history of life on earth was to get to us?
Just H. sapiens? Chimps or sturgeon aren't part of the "completion"?
logician
Well-Known Member
Read Dawkin's "The Ancestor's Tale", or S J Gould's "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory", 2 monumental works on evolutionary theory. Evolution is fact, not fiction, these and other books give loads of evidence that evolution has occurred and is still occuring.