Which Will Win Out In The End: Creationism or Evolution?

[Smoke]

The turtle did not just happen to grow a protective shell, it was intended.

Everyone agrees that the turtle didn't "just happen to" grow a shell. To imagine, despite the lack of any evidence whatsoever, that there was some intention guiding the process may be emotionally satisfying, but it adds nothing to our understanding of the turtle or the process.

 

[Super Universe]

Agreed.

No, no thats the wrong way to look at it. If you look at the finnished product, it seems far too complicated. Its better to look at the starting point and view the slow steps and tiny changes it took to reach the final product.

Evolution is a survival mechanism. If it where perfect, animals and plants would be practically invincible. Also, you are still using that backwards thinking. Trust me, it makes much more sense when viewed from start to finnish than from finnish to start.

By any chance are you an Intelligent Desighn supporter? You are right that turtles did not spontaneously sprout shells. The turtle's ancesters had a slow toughening of the skin and developed cartalige and bone structures which slowly become what we know recognize as a shell.

But I didn't look at the finished product, which is a sentient human being, I looked at one part of it. What is a heart without a body?

My point was to show that this one small part is incredibly important to the whole and every single small part of that part is incredibly important to it so much that it defies the odds, it defies probability without more active control. Humans did not evolve by accident or by a one in a million chance. We were a certainty, the only unknown was how long it would take.

I am not using backwards thinking, you are. Evolution does not give life to chemicals and it does not give sentience to life. Where is this in the theory of evolution?

 

[Real Sorceror]

But I didn't look at the finished product, which is a sentient human being, I looked at one part of it. What is a heart without a body?

The heart evolved along with the body. All our ancester species had hearts. if you go back far enough, you will see that the heart evolved from a simpler organ, and that organ evolved from an even simpler organ, and that evolved from a specialized body part. Have you seen what a cockroaches heart looks like? Its just a tube that pulses. Our heart evolved slowly from some simple organ like that.

My point was to show that this one small part is incredibly important to the whole and every single small part of that part is incredibly important to it so much that it defies the odds, it defies probability without more active control. Humans did not evolve by accident or by a one in a million chance. We were a certainty, the only unknown was how long it would take.

Organs do not evolve seperately from the creature. All animals have the neccassary parts they need to survive. These parts change slowly as the species's survival needs change.
I agree that sentient life is certianty. Given time and change, intelligent life will always eventually evolve. If humans hadn't evolved, some other intelligent race would have.

I am not using backwards thinking, you are. Evolution does not give life to chemicals and it does not give sentience to life. Where is this in the theory of evolution?

You are right in that evolution does not give life to chemicals.
You are wrong in that evolution does give sentience to life. Sentience species have evolved, are evolving, and will evolve. We currently share the planet with over a dozen sentient or near sentient animals.

 

[logician]

"I agree that sentient life is certianty. Given time and change, intelligent life will always eventually evolve. If humans hadn't evolved, some other intelligent race would have"

Poppycock, read SJ Gould sometime, life went on for almost a billion years w/o homo sapiens evolving. There is no "trend" towards intelligence or "progress" in evolution, that is a myth propagated by those claiming that mankind was predestined. If a meteor hadn't wiped out the dinosaurs, mammals would still be small creatures running around in the undergrowth.

If intelligent life was common elsewhere in our galaxy, why haven't we found any evidence of it?

 

[Super Universe]

The heart evolved along with the body. All our ancester species had hearts. if you go back far enough, you will see that the heart evolved from a simpler organ, and that organ evolved from an even simpler organ, and that evolved from a specialized body part. Have you seen what a cockroaches heart looks like? Its just a tube that pulses. Our heart evolved slowly from some simple organ like that.

The human heart has four chambers, a large vein that sends blood to the lungs to receive oxygen where it then returns to the heart to be pumped out to the body.

All this from a simply pulsing tube? No way. It's built into the basic design, there are many options for pumping blood but all are within the capabilities of the coding, DNA. Evolution happens because it's designed to happen within certain parameters.

Organs do not evolve seperately from the creature. All animals have the neccassary parts they need to survive. These parts change slowly as the species's survival needs change. I agree that sentient life is certianty. Given time and change, intelligent life will always eventually evolve. If humans hadn't evolved, some other intelligent race would have.

Organs don't evolve separately? If evolution was such a haphazard, one in a million chance of success thing as you think then why don't they?

Giving credit for sentience to evolution is like giving credit to the inventor of fireworks for the astronauts landing on the moon.

You are right in that evolution does not give life to chemicals. You are wrong in that evolution does give sentience to life. Sentience species have evolved, are evolving, and will evolve. We currently share the planet with over a dozen sentient or near sentient animals.

Sentient species do evolve but evolution does not make us aware. Without it we would be animals who depend purely on instinct.

Sentient animals? There are none. The two meanings conflict.

 

[Real Sorceror]

Poppycock, read SJ Gould sometime, life went on for almost a billion years w/o homo sapiens evolving. There is no "trend" towards intelligence or "progress" in evolution, that is a myth propagated by those claiming that mankind was predestined. If a meteor hadn't wiped out the dinosaurs, mammals would still be small creatures running around in the undergrowth.

If intelligent life was common elsewhere in our galaxy, why haven't we found any evidence of it?

Are you saying that dinosaurs can't evolve into an intelligent species? If they had been given time and opportunity, I'm almost certian sentient reptiles would have evolved. We don't know how intelligent extinct species where. I'm sure animals as smart as dolphins and gorillas have evolved on several occasions before modern times.

 

[Real Sorceror]

The human heart has four chambers, a large vein that sends blood to the lungs to receive oxygen where it then returns to the heart to be pumped out to the body.
All this from a simply pulsing tube? No way.

Again, you're looking at the amazingly complex finished product. I'd tell you how the heart evolved, by I'm not educated enough to describe the vast changes and minute detials. There is also the problem that organs almost never fossilize, so we have to do a lot of educated guesswork and comparisons to modern animals.

It's built into the basic design, there are many options for pumping blood but all are within the capabilities of the coding, DNA. Evolution happens because it's designed to happen within certain parameters.

Do you believe a fish can evolve into an amphibean? Can an amphibean evolve into a reptile?

Organs don't evolve separately?

Right. The creature evolves as a whole. Every part of its body changing as a whole.

If evolution was such a haphazard, one in a million chance of success thing as you think then why don't they?

One in a million, eh? Well, what if there are several trillion chances for it to occur? Then a one in a million chance will happen several billion times, won't it?

Sentient species do evolve but evolution does not make us aware. Without it we would be animals who depend purely on instinct.

Sentient animals? There are none. The two meanings conflict.

Wrong. How would you define "sentience"? Would you agree that a sentient being has all these qualities:
*Self-conciousness and Self-awarness
* Intelligence and capacity for reason
*The ability to speak and understand a language
I can name a few animals that meet all these requirements.

 

[roli]

Truth will prevail in the end,as it always does ,just never on our terms or in our time
I believe the things seen are temporary and perishing as we speak,regardless of all our knowledge and innovative abilities to prolong the existence of life but the things unseen are eternal and will someday appear to all,as the realm in which truly exsisted and was the one we should have invested in,that being the spiritual.
Jhn 4:24God is spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It depends very much on the state of the world in 100 years.
May be the various fundamentalists will have so developed their hate for one another,
that the world will have reverted to a total state of conflict.

Under those conditions the secular rationalists might be forced to either take sides or be eliminated.

 

[Quiddity]

Under those conditions the secular rationalists might be forced to either take sides or be eliminated.

Not what I was thinking at all. That's pretty brutal...

 

[roli]

A synthesis of the two.

I have said this before, but I guess it needs saying again, Creationism, as in Genesis, I don't believe in. The extent to which I believe in Creationism is limited to the one ingredient that God 'added to the soup' for life to occurr.

Having said that; creation has been and gone; it is a past event - although the 'pool' of available souls is still 'running'.

We will see the effects of evolution as time passes by, but we shan't see any more evidence(unless Christ comes back within the period of time)of creationism; therefore, evolution has to win hands down.

How can you be a follower of Christ according to your title(not that any title validates salvation)and profess that you believe not in the Genisis account,if I understand your profession,not that is the question at hand ,but it intrigues me when I saw that.

On the contrary,not to argue but creation is something I often reflect back on as a Christian,(born again)and is to me continuously active in my life,that is the place God is continually calling us back to,that relationship Adam and Eve once had.
Creation to me is also a full expression daily of the attributes and hand of God and His desire to bring pleasure to me by the beauty He created to be enjoyed.
Not to sound to religious or spiritual but I need the reminder daily that creation was intended for me to enjoy as I and you are that creation as well and to know that God has never given up on us but pursues us daily that we would seek him for him.

You are that evidence of creation that you said." we shan't, see again" new life everyday is another sample of creation,

Evolution process within species and DNA (adaptation /progression, not the theory of evolution,that we came from none living organisms)is only an ongoing by product and natural occurence of the creation event, evolution (adaptation or progression) in itself is not a Phenomena as much as it is a point of refutation of God's existence for many, Evolution is only a natural observable, documented science which is defined truly as only having knowledge of the creation, therefore you tell me how can the study of something be greater then the creation event of that same thing ?

 

[fantome profane]

Are you saying that dinosaurs can't evolve into an intelligent species? If they had been given time and opportunity, I'm almost certian sentient reptiles would have evolved. We don't know how intelligent extinct species where. I'm sure animals as smart as dolphins and gorillas have evolved on several occasions before modern times.

No, all wanderer085 is saying is there is no reason to assume that dinosaurs would have evolved into what we would consider an intelligent species. It might have been possible, but that does not meant that it would have been inevitable, or even likely. Dinosaurs were on this planet for over 150 million years without showing any signs of increasing intelligence. There was no need for it. They were doing quite well. Intelligence is only one of the possible survival tactics a species can develop, and not necessarily the best one. We have a long way to go until we can say that we have been as successful as the dinosaurs were. And there are millions of species still living on this earth that are doing just fine without our kind of bulbous balloon brains.

Life existed on this planet for billions of years before the arrival of an intelligent species. It would be ludicrous to assume that evolution naturally moves in the direction of intelligence.

And although it might be possible for another intelligent species to evolve after human beings are gone from this world, there is no reason to assume that this would happen.

*Self-conciousness and Self-awarness
* Intelligence and capacity for reason
*The ability to speak and understand a language
I can name a few animals that meet all these requirements.

So can I.
In fact I happen to be one.:yes:

 

[Real Sorceror]

*think* Ok, you make more sense. I agree.

 

[logician]

A case can be made that an "intellgient" species such as ourselves is harmful to life in general, as we are consuming resources at a prodigious rate, driving other species to extinction at an alarming rate, and decreasing biodiversity to a dangerously low level.

 

[Super Universe]

How can you be a follower of Christ according to your title(not that any title validates salvation)and profess that you believe not in the Genisis account,if I understand your profession,not that is the question at hand ,but it intrigues me when I saw that.

On the contrary,not to argue but creation is something I often reflect back on as a Christian,(born again)and is to me continuously active in my life,that is the place God is continually calling us back to,that relationship Adam and Eve once had.
Creation to me is also a full expression daily of the attributes and hand of God and His desire to bring pleasure to me by the beauty He created to be enjoyed.
Not to sound to religious or spiritual but I need the reminder daily that creation was intended for me to enjoy as I and you are that creation as well and to know that God has never given up on us but pursues us daily that we would seek him for him.

You are that evidence of creation that you said." we shan't, see again" new life everyday is another sample of creation,

Evolution process within species and DNA (adaptation /progression, not the theory of evolution,that we came from none living organisms)is only an ongoing by product and natural occurence of the creation event, evolution (adaptation or progression) in itself is not a Phenomena as much as it is a point of refutation of God's existence for many, Evolution is only a natural observable, documented science which is defined truly as only having knowledge of the creation, therefore you tell me how can the study of something be greater then the creation event of that same thing ?

Since you like to throw big stones at others perhaps you can explain to me when Jesus said that we should believe in the book of Genesis? You'd think if it was really that important He would have at least brought it up once.

You argue that this is necessary to be a Christian when the real reason is because you feel threatened by another Christian who does not believe in every insignificant religious view as you.

I think your old time religious ideas are far outdated. The universe was not created in seven days and men do not have one less rib than females.

If God truly wanted an "Adam and Eve" relationship He could have it in a snap but the universe is not for the earth and human beings, the earth and human beings are for the universe.

 

[Super Universe]

No, all wanderer085 is saying is there is no reason to assume that dinosaurs would have evolved into what we would consider an intelligent species. It might have been possible, but that does not meant that it would have been inevitable, or even likely. Dinosaurs were on this planet for over 150 million years without showing any signs of increasing intelligence. There was no need for it. They were doing quite well. Intelligence is only one of the possible survival tactics a species can develop, and not necessarily the best one. We have a long way to go until we can say that we have been as successful as the dinosaurs were. And there are millions of species still living on this earth that are doing just fine without our kind of bulbous balloon brains.

Life existed on this planet for billions of years before the arrival of an intelligent species. It would be ludicrous to assume that evolution naturally moves in the direction of intelligence.

And although it might be possible for another intelligent species to evolve after human beings are gone from this world, there is no reason to assume that this would happen.

So can I.
In fact I happen to be one.:yes:

A scientist might view longevity as a determining factor in the success of a species but I certainly don't.

What dinosaur created a symphony?
What dinosaur looked at the moon and then went there?
What dinosaur conducted an experiment?
What animal created beauty and called it art?

 

[Real Sorceror]

A scientist might view longevity as a determining factor in the success of a species but I certainly don't.

What dinosaur created a symphony?
What dinosaur looked at the moon and then went there?
What dinosaur conducted an experiment?
What animal created beauty and called it art?

Gorillas can speak fluent sign language.
They recognize their own name and the name of other gorrilas and humans.
They recognize their own reflection.
Elephants and gorillas mourn their dead.
African Grey Parots are said to be as smart as a small child.

 

[logician]

What species kills for pleasure only?

What species tortures it's own for pleasure or profit?

What species is driving millions of other species to extinction?

Is this success?

 

[Real Sorceror]

What species kills for pleasure only?

What species tortures it's own for pleasure or profit?

What species is driving millions of other species to extinction?

Is this success?

No, and I never said it was. With greater intelligence comes greater capacity for good and evil. The sword cuts both ways.

 

[Booko]

What species kills for pleasure only?

Cats.