Because that would mess with the creationist idea that humans were created separately from all other animals.
-
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!
The battle of evolution vs creationism
- Thread starter bobhikes
- Start date
adi2d
Active Member
So where are our resident creationists? Still celebrating the winter solstice?
I thought they would be back by now
Last edited:
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
Guys, seriously!! Did you not attend all those creationist meetings, or at least watch their YouTube infomercials about how we are so special that we were created just like that without ever having any connection to the other mammals?
I mean, that Craig dude cannot possibly be wrong here. He quotes the bible some and interprets it for those who have a problem reading it no doubtsome of us (I hate to admit it) are apparently not getting that message right.
So to clear it up, evolution is nothing but a story, creationism or ID (either one works with that since its much the same thing) is the real thing.
now of course there is the little problem with god creating man in his image and coming up with Charlie Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Dennis Rader, Andrei Chikatilo, or Ed Gain, just to name a few.
I mean, that Craig dude cannot possibly be wrong here. He quotes the bible some and interprets it for those who have a problem reading it no doubtsome of us (I hate to admit it) are apparently not getting that message right.
So to clear it up, evolution is nothing but a story, creationism or ID (either one works with that since its much the same thing) is the real thing.
now of course there is the little problem with god creating man in his image and coming up with Charlie Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Dennis Rader, Andrei Chikatilo, or Ed Gain, just to name a few.
Enai de a lukal
Well-Known Member
You guys, we scared all the creationists away with all our facts ... We oughtta be ashamed of ourselves... 
I know that Call_of_the_Wild has been on since I've made my Mibbit post, but I don't know what he's been doing. I'm still waiting on him to talk to me about setting up a meeting time for the ERV debate.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Berkley university has a database for the fossil specimens that contains 50,000 invertebrates, 40,000 microfossils, 40,000 plants, and 230,000 vertebrates.
American Museum of Natural History New York has a couple of floors filled with specimens, and my understanding is that only a fraction of them are researched.
And there are more places like this.
There's no lack of fossils, and there's no lack of intermediates. Or put it in creationist terms, there are a huge amount of "kinds".
American Museum of Natural History New York has a couple of floors filled with specimens, and my understanding is that only a fraction of them are researched.
And there are more places like this.
There's no lack of fossils, and there's no lack of intermediates. Or put it in creationist terms, there are a huge amount of "kinds".
Last edited:
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
there is this great website where you can look at the latest kinds of kinds. they have a top twenty newly discovered fossils of the year article (1213 edition). apparently, new kinds related to old kinds are found in significant numbers every year.
Top 20 Fossil Species Discovered in 2013 | Paleontology | Sci-News.com
not to forget the new kinds of kinds discovered the same year.
Top 20 New Species Discovered in 2013 | Biology | Sci-News.com
Top 20 Fossil Species Discovered in 2013 | Paleontology | Sci-News.com
not to forget the new kinds of kinds discovered the same year.
Top 20 New Species Discovered in 2013 | Biology | Sci-News.com
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
List of few selected transitional fossils (there are more just not listed): (A few) transitional fossils
averageJOE
zombie
Just be prepared for his smoking gun argument; "Unless ERV's can explain how a dog can produce a non-dog there is nothing to debate."
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
do hybrids count? or maybe dingos and other wild dogs as being different kinds of dogs? Tigons and Ligers, maybe?
Do we actually care what creationists try to pass for science and/or scientific explanations that are in line with religious accounts of the beginning? I mean, even among religious people these fundamentalists are considered to be the fringe element.
Do we actually care what creationists try to pass for science and/or scientific explanations that are in line with religious accounts of the beginning? I mean, even among religious people these fundamentalists are considered to be the fringe element.
Last edited:
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
I've never understood this argument...
To be fair, I'm a bit slow.. But first, I don't really understand the definition for "kind".. It seems to mean "similar, only when i want similarities"
But my real complaint would be, and I beg forgives if someone posted this already...
If a "kind" birthed a "non-kind" i.e. a cat having an elephant baby, wouldn't that be proof AGAINST evolution???
How it the "all children are similar yet slightly different from their parents" argument not... You know.. Seen as PRO-evolution?
To be fair, I'm a bit slow.. But first, I don't really understand the definition for "kind".. It seems to mean "similar, only when i want similarities"
But my real complaint would be, and I beg forgives if someone posted this already...
If a "kind" birthed a "non-kind" i.e. a cat having an elephant baby, wouldn't that be proof AGAINST evolution???
How it the "all children are similar yet slightly different from their parents" argument not... You know.. Seen as PRO-evolution?
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
it just seems to be one of those vague terms that makes arguing with creationists so much fun because they actually assume that this is a scientific designation with meaning.
that kind non-kind nonsense could be looked at as follows: if a cat and a dog had offspring , let's say a cog or dat, then it still would be a kind of something, due to the fact that each parent is a "kind", hence the offspring is a a "kind of". makes perfect sense in this kind of universe.
Last edited:
The debate will center around one thing and one thing only: how the creationist model explains ERV patterns. For all intents and purposes, we will be assuming that no one ever had the idea of evolution. So that little argument will be irrelevant. If he wants to debate evolution, he can do it here on the forums. In chat, creationism will be the focus.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Yup. That's how it's used.
Yes, it would be since evolution is a very slow process of very, very small changes.
It is, but creationists don't see things in a continuous way. Most creationists see things in black-and-white and nothing in between.
Yeah, I'm sure he's gonna try to bring evolution into it anyway, but I'll just have to call his hand on it each time he does. It should be interesting (and probably frustrating) either way. He does say that the evidence sides more strongly with creationism, so now will be the chance for him to prove it.fantôme profane;3622851 said:
I will be fall on the floor surprised
faint if you can get him to talk about ERV's at all. In any context in any format. But good luck.Speaking of Neanderthals interbreeding with Homo sapiens: Neanderthal genes found in East Asian population|Home|chinadaily.com.cn
Simurgh
Atheist Triple Goddess
and here is a talk about genetics, evolution and our the inner neanderthal.
Ancient clues | TED Playlists | TED
Ancient clues | TED Playlists | TED
FranklinMichaelV.3
Well-Known Member
The life from non-life argument confuses me. Because would we say that DNA is alive? I don't think it's counted as a living thing. How about proteins? Or the Chemical pathways? They are not alive, they are non-living yet without them what we call "life" can't exist. The line between Life and Non-Life isn't so clearcut.