Evolution or God????. . . .

The fossil record does not support evolution. There is no evidence of one species evolving into another species.

Carbon dating has also been proven to be inaccurate.


As to the Bible...there are more historical texts that were written by secular authors that support the Bible as a hostorically accurate manuscript. Archeological evidence keeps proving the Bibles history of man as true.


I do think that God created everything....but there was adaptation later. This occured within a species. No species has evolved into another species.

i wish this thread would create or evolve an end, im tired of seeing this one get bumpped lol


lessee... god's supposed to be omnipotent, so that means even if everything started by creationism, it still evolved by far beyond the begining, humans were not the begining, and werent just *poof* created, but the origonal circumstances in the begining of time were likely creation.


and even then, that was an evolution of the mind and it's omnipotency, there really is no begining, just an endless fluxuation/evolution.

in the 'begining' and 'end' it's all one demensional, inbetween is just a massive chaotic evolution of thought, life, and personality.

mrdevious - past present and future are all one therefore humans will always be around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PureEvil760

mrdevious - past present and future are all one therefore humans will always be around.

---

personally I can't say I've been a big proponent of the existence of time. however, there are methods through relativity in which "time" can be slowed and a person can move "forward", by slowing down the speed at which subatomic particles move through excellerated velocities beyond the speed of light. But anyway, are you speaking of the Chinese cyclical time frame? It's certainly not a proven theory that could be presented as fact, but it does have validity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

The fossil record does not support evolution. There is no evidence of one species evolving into another species.
Carbon dating has also been proven to be inaccurate.
As to the Bible...there are more historical texts that were written by secular authors that support the Bible as a hostorically accurate manuscript. Archeological evidence keeps proving the Bibles history of man as true.
I do think that God created everything....but there was adaptation later. This occured within a species. No species has evolved into another species.

---

You couldn't be more RIGHT!!!, and what a great topic....
Micro-Evolution is legit...its the evolution of species. Macroevolution on the other hand has no proof.

"Donâ??t mistake micro-evolution for Darwinian evolution. They are not related. When a Christian says they do not believe in evolution, it is not a reference to changes in specific traits. It is a reference to changes that require crossing the DNA limitations. When the facts stare evolutionists in the face, they are reduced to either insulting those who present the evidence or they must admit their world view doesnâ??t hold water." - Eddie Snipes

So, you're saying God created Animals seperate from plants, or bacteria, or He created Man seperate from horses, or flowers?

This was very interesting.
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...peciation.html

I'm saying God created us all seperately. Animals of the earth, man, animals of the sea, and birds of the air. Then adpatation took over which gave us things like various breeds of dogs, for example, but only 1 type of dog was originally created.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOVElife

I personally believe what I have seen!

There is actually Evidence that Evolution is accurate, fossils etc! I have yet to be shown any evidence that I believe that we all came from God in a Few Days! I mean, it's evidence against rumour!

---

There is no..I repeat NO evidence whatsoever to support the idea of Evolution (the view of evolution that we evolved from single cell organism)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth1184

There is no..I repeat NO evidence whatsoever to support the idea of Evolution (the view of evolution that we evolved from single cell organism)

---

Ha! There is evidence for the evolution of the Universe from the Big Bang to our current situation. Evolution is strongly supported by the entire scientific community because thatâ??s what the evidence points towards! Evidence? The cosmic microwave background, the age of globular clusters combined with their main sequence life time for nuclear burning, complete lack of blue giants in elliptical galaxies, the metal abundances in the Universe (my favorite part of this Universe is that our existence depended on the same process that is going on inside of our Sun. We are all made out of stellar ash from super novae).

I don't know as much about biological evolution but I do know that If one species is separated into different groups, so that no genetic material can pass from one group to the other, after time they will differ enough though mutations and variation to form 2 new species.

I don't understand how some creationist can accept variation and not evolution. If animals "change a little at a time" (though mutations and variation) given enough time they will develop into new animals. It has everything to do about genetics, not what you as a human classify the animals as.

If there was another model that could better explain what we observe then it would replace evolution. But nothing else even comes close. I've yet to hear either one piece of solid evidence to support any other theory or disprove evolution.

The big bang would include the theory that our galaxy is spinning and becoming wider...this is not so. We are not getting further away from the sun.

If we were wouldn't that mean that at the beginning we would have been much closer to the sun? That would mean that life could not have been here under such conditions. The sun has always been at just the right distance for life on earth.

"I don't understand how some creationist can accept variation and not evolution. If animals "change a little at a time" (though mutations and variation) given enough time they will develop into new animals. It has everything to do about genetics, not what you as a human classify the animals as."

Variation or Speciation is completely different. Speciation would be like a a dog evolving into labs, retrievers, chiuawawa (sp?), and any other variation. Even a dog growing wings and losing some other trait. The main point is that no new information is added to the dna.

Macroevolution involves taking some simple matter and eventually evolve into something much more complex. It would be like taking a normal skateboard and turning it into a helicopter. Tons of information must be added for this to happen, and it is simply not possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth1184

There is no..I repeat NO evidence whatsoever to support the idea of Evolution (the view of evolution that we evolved from single cell organism)

---

the problem with this thread is duality.

it thrives on seperating god from reality, to say that god is not human, to say that god is not table, to say god is not oxygen.

god IS evolution, this, reality, is the evolution of god.


everything has a single, one demensional starting point; god.

the universe was created by god, but ALL life within it was a product of god's own evolution, reflected in physical bodies.


... and come on! evidence can be destroyed, every politician knows that. :D :dance:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

The big bang would include the theory that our galaxy is spinning and becoming wider...this is not so. We are not getting further away from the sun.

If we were wouldn't that mean that at the beginning we would have been much closer to the sun? That would mean that life could not have been here under such conditions. The sun has always been at just the right distance for life on earth.

---

do yo uhave any clue how ignorant that was?


it's not going to take 2 years for any noticable changes in distance from the sun, let alone any distance our sun is to the center of the galaxy, which i suspect is a giant sun.

it would take some 200 eons just to notice an inch of distance!

if we sped up the speed of the galaxy, not only would it be a beautiful foreworks display, but we'd see so far beyond our god damned noses...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigp1612

The main point is that no new information is added to the dna.

---

This statement proves how ignorant you are on this subject. DNA codes for proteins, these proteins build structures and these are seen as traits. Labs look diffrent then other dogs because they have diffrent DNA. But it's still close enough for them toreproduce with other kinds. Now try crossing a Chimp with a Bonobo and you wont get squat. This is because two diffrent species of apes were seperated by (I think it's the Congo) a river thus cutting off and genetic flow. Now enough time has passed that they have diverged into two diffrent species.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigp1612

Macroevolution involves taking some simple matter and eventually evolve into something much more complex.

---

This is a complete misconception of how evolution works. Things don't necessarily have to evolve to become more complex. There is variation and mutations within a species and those better suited to their environment have a higher chance of survival. How can you say extinct species were less complex? That's bullshit. The Universe as a whole is complex and so was life as it started and evolved. Science is the only tool we can use to simplify it enough to understand it without losing sight of what may really be happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigp1612

It would be like taking a normal skateboard and turning it into a helicopter. Tons of information must be added for this to happen, and it is simply not possible.

---

This analogy proves nothing, and we are all much stupider for reading this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mont974x4

The big bang would include the theory that our galaxy is spinning and becoming wider...this is not so. We are not getting further away from the sun.

If we were wouldn't that mean that at the beginning we would have been much closer to the sun? That would mean that life could not have been here under such conditions. The sun has always been at just the right distance for life on earth.

---

A galaxy is not our solar system. Both are gravitationaly bound (not unwinding) but they are both infulanced by very diffrent mechinisms. Our planet was closer to the Sun (Not that much closer), but it was cooler and less luminous then it is today. The solar system was formed out of a collapsing gas/dust cloud most of that material (that stayed in the solar system) formed the Sun. The planets and other minor bodies formed out of a gas/dust torris around the Sun.

Yea Stoner Shadow Wolf is right about one thing (Not about the center of the solar system being a giant sun) "it's not going to take 2 years for any noticable changes in distance from the sun, let alone any distance our sun is to the center of the galaxy..."

I don't know where your getting the idea that our galaxy is widing from the Big Bang Theory. Our Galaxy isn't expanding away from itself, but other galaxies at significant distances (were talking a couple dozen mega parsecs here) are.

oh, please share as to what is at the center of our galaxy, i've always wondered really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

oh, please share as to what is at the center of our galaxy, i've always wondered really.

---

We've had this discussion before. Well anyway I offered a link above. It's not just our Galaxy, in almost every other Galaxy you'll probally find a super massive Black hole. Exept in irregulars like the LMC. I'm not saying they lack BH's. Just that irregulars don't have them, just not at their centers and may not me super massive.

ah PROBABLY doesnt cut it. my guess is as good as anyone else's, with or without an educated guess at that.


an ineducated guess could later be proven, even though the fool who guessed it was just spouting out random ideas and speculations.

but im sure that it's a black hole... hell it's likely a black hole that is filled up to the brim! lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

ah PROBABLY doesnt cut it.

---

I said Proabaly because we haven't checked out every single galaxy's center, but all the Ellipticals and Spirals we have looked at has a big old muther in the middle. I guess "big" if we are talking mass, not volume :D

the evolution of the galaxy...


it spins... oooh shiny... *drool*

If you created for yourself the most wild far fetched explanation of the universe it would still be further out then that, those entitie's are so far beyond our understanding we would be like mere bacteria.

I'm jealous. Nowhere else in the Universe is Cannabis illegal.

Yeah and even though "the ships" travel at 100,000 times the speed of light there still is no damn end in sight, MY God mY god

http://www.becominghuman.org/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seedbare

If you created for yourself the most wild far fetched explanation of the universe it would still be further out then that, those entitie's are so far beyond our understanding we would be like mere bacteria.

---

Compared to our size? It's so hard to get an idea of how big the Universe is, any ratio doesn't do much good.

Radius (atom)=1x10^-10 m
Height human=2m

human/atom=20,000,000,000 times larger

Distance sun to Earth=1.5x10^11 m
Distance to Center of Galaxy =3Ã?10^20 m

Distance to Galactic center/distance to sun=2,000,000,000 times further

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoonStarer420

Compared to our size? It's so hard to get an idea of how big the Universe is, any ratio doesn't do much good.

Radius (atom)=1x10^-10 m
Height human=2m

human/atom=20,000,000,000 times larger

Distance sun to Earth=1.5x10^11 m
Distance to Center of Galaxy =3Ã?10^20 m

Distance to Galactic center/distance to sun=2,000,000,000 times further

---

Ha it takes 10 times more atoms to stack up to our height then AU to just the center of our Galaxy! They're so fucking small! Mary Jane really makes you apprechiate The Universe.

I found this cool link on the transition between reptiles and mammals..

http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm

had this convo so many times before...

Darwin himself made the point that Evolution works until you get down to the cellular level.

He observed that there is one part of a cell that couldn't have possibly happened by chance. The mechanism a cell uses to propel itself is an intricate outboard motor that is constructed in such a way that, in Darwin's opinion, it had to have been designed by a "Grand Engineer". By acknowleding this, he himself conceded that there must be a "higher power" be it God, aliens or whatever.

The answer is most likley niether one of those.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by texstang65

had this convo so many times before...

Darwin himself made the point that Evolution works until you get down to the cellular level.

He observed that there is one part of a cell that couldn't have possibly happened by chance. The mechanism a cell uses to propel itself is an intricate outboard motor that is constructed in such a way that, in Darwin's opinion, it had to have been designed by a "Grand Engineer". By acknowleding this, he himself conceded that there must be a "higher power" be it God, aliens or whatever.

---

The simple and single celled organisms took a lot longer to evolve than animals. Most of the time the earth has been populated with just bacteria and alage! So, they had a much longer time to evolve those complex proteins that they use for locomotion. It may simply seem impossible because youre looking at an almost incomprehensible amount of time between virus -----> bacteria/alage

A creator god could have just helped guide evolution, without taking a totally direct approach to influencing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by texstang65

Darwin himself made the point that Evolution works until you get down to the cellular level.

---

Just keep in mind that Darwinâ??s original theory is not the same as the current theory of Evolution. He had no knowledge of DNA, and only included natural selection as the only mechanism for driving evolution. He didn't know about mutations or even why species had variation. With organic molecules so common in our Universe I think it seems quite possible for life to arise, under the right conditions, from a combination of chemistry and physics.

"The simple and single celled organisms took a lot longer to evolve than animals"
Yea really, a few billion vs. half a billion or so. (Somthing like this)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smokincajun

I prefer the idea of "adaptation" to evolution. There's tons of material out there for the pros & cons of both though. I believe in creation, but not so much a "poof" type of thing. While the Bible says that everything was created in 6 days, it also says that to God, a second is like a thousand years...I guess one would need to be a scholar in Arabic to determine the root meanings of the words to decipher what time frame it means exactly.

Also, something I've always wondered...what did a platypus evolve from? A duck and a beaver? I wonder which was the "mom" & which was the "dad".

And something else...if we're evolved from Apes, how come there aren't dog-people, cat-people, dolphin-people, etc? I know apes are smart & all, but I've seen studies where parrots out-performed chimps, so I don't know if it has much to do with the brain size.

---

yeah man but think about this witch came first the chicken or the egg, if it takes the chicken to have the egg then how was the first egg made or chicken if it wasnt some form of a magicall POOF. And why does everything that has a name so appropriately fit it like who in the hell came up with all the names for everything and why is it that no other name for that thing fits , its insane when you really start thinking about it. And just the fact that the entire world in its own language knows everything pretty much by the same description, go figure how we all know that its crazy.

ooppps forgot to give my vote on the question I believe it was both, of course stripped of all the labeling.... I feel we evolved scientifically so far till we needed this other element called spirit or metapyhsical, then we assimilated that into ourselves to evolve witch is how evolution works, its when the agreesor finally is absorbed by the absorber and the 2 things assimilate and become something new.

We all come from animals and most of the time we act like animals.

God is an imaginary friend for grown-ups

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by willystylle

We all come from animals and most of the time we act like animals.

God is an imaginary friend for grown-ups

---

Amen...

if we evolved from monkeys how come there are still monkeys on trees? how come we dont see them becoming human? Pigs and humans heart are almost identical, does it make us evolved from pigs because we have similar hearts? we did not evolve, we adopted the environment as the animals did, the stronger survived others did not.
Darwins biggets mistake is calling his theory wrong, he should said "Adoptation" not "Evolution"
Many of darwins theory were proved otherwise in our time. It is absurd to discuss this topic.
God created us, but the environment kept changing so did we and the animals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by willystylle

We all come from animals and most of the time we act like animals.

God is an imaginary friend for grown-ups

---

no we dont act like animals, we are worst then them. Animals dont kill for fun we do.
Dont count me in I did not come from animals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paparose

if we evolved from monkeys how come there are still monkeys on trees?

---

This has already been answered countless times all over these forums. We didn't come from monkeys, monkey's share a common ancestor, along with 98.5% of our genetic code.

Quote:

---

Pigs and humans heart are almost identical, does it make us evolved from pigs because we have similar hearts? we did not evolve, we adopted the environment as the animals did, the stronger survived others did not.
Darwins biggets mistake is calling his theory wrong, he should said "Adoptation" not "Evolution"

---

"Adaptation" is the word you're looking for.

Quote:

---

Many of darwins theory were proved otherwise in our time. It is absurd to discuss this topic.

---

Darwin isn't the soul developer of evolution. And just because you declare an opinion absurd doesn't prove it so and end the discussion. If you want absurd, try defending creation, considering every argument I've ever heard for it has utterly flawed logic.

personally, i believe humans are the result of combinations of animals... seeing as we share a lot of the characteristics of many animals, i would assume that there were more factors influencing the developement of the human evolution thatn just monkies and apes.

not entirely sure how to explain it... and i dont really see how it is logical, considering pigs dont mate with iguanas who dont mate with gorillas...

but what if there is more to evolution than just the genetics? perhaps the blood of another animal could have preverse enough effects to affect the children that animal bears? i mean... wolves eat deer, what if the blood of the deer being ingested by the wolf can affect the wolf's children over mellenia to be born with antlers? well not nessacarily WITH them, but with the capacity for them to develope (jackalope anyone?).


overall, i still say evolution is like AI for god... a sort of way of keeping us in check or some such... hey, im not awake yet... i shouldnt be thinking about this stuff.