Some front line views of the war against God.

[Hardcore Newbie]

So some people may make the relation of evolution being just as stupid for the fact that it too is based upon no evidence, the way you percieve the theory is up to you, you may think jumping off a 100 story building and dieing from the collision as an absurd theory.

Evolution is built upon evidence. You clearly show that you don't know what evolution is when you refer to lack of interspecies breeding to be a hinder to evolution, nor the need for dogs to have monkeys. Evolution does not claim those things for it to work. If evolution did claim those things, then yes, it'd be a layman's theory, because there's no proof for this.

There is little evidence to prove its absurdity yet there is little evidence to prove that we evolved from apes, I was just making a religion to the two theories evolution and astrology.

so evolution = astrology.

When you learn what evolution means, you won't make these kinds of assumptions.

Creationism = Astrology

Questioning everything and considering every angle = common sense

Why not consider it? There's nothing wrong with considering things but science that is taught in class rooms shouldn't be based on suppositions.

Why? Because the theory is founded upon such a high degree of certainty - by you?

You quote this again, later, and actually make points.

Send me the link to the study please, sounds interesting.

The meaning of the word deduce is to form an opinion from a solid base of fact.

Do you think the opinion that we evolved from apes is based upon solid fact?

From what I've read, we have a common ancestor with apes, if that's what you mean. I think this is based on solid fact, yes.

Why do you keep rambling on about the positions of the stars? The fact remains that the two (astrology and evolution) are related due to the fact that neither can be proven to any certainty to call it a universal law of science.

Clearly you're not accepting any proof whatsoever.

No, your talking about devolution.

Evolution would not take away elements we would need to survive, because it then defies the point in evolving, you donâ??t evolve and become a less adaptable being.

Its called natural selection, select the bits we need and throw away the ones we dont.

I mentioned it because you brought up silver reflective skin, a detriment. Adapting silver skin would be devolution.

The sun is also not the only element to provide us with vitamin D food sources of vitamin D are milk and other dairy products fortified with vitamin D. Vitamin D is also found in oily fish (e.g., herring, salmon and sardines) as well as in cod liver oil.

There are plenty of ways we can get Vitamin D, but whatever condition (I don't know what kind of fish were around wherever we evolved) we got the sun to help us with our vitamin D.

So why did these people in very cold climates lose their fur to begin with?

Because our species originated in Africa.

Is it because they felt it more efficient and better having to go out, kill animals clean the fur and animal and wear the coat over their natural body hair? Thus natural selection felt this a better option as oppose to simply "growing a permanent coat".

The easiest explanation (tho I actually haven't looked into how fast and far on the timescale man emigrated from africa, so bear with me) is that man was smart enough to do it, so we did it. If you move a lot further north, are you going not wear fur so that you can hopefully evolve with it some unknown amount of generations? No, you're going to wear fur because you're cold. If man weren't smart enough to get into those regions, man wouldn't be there.

Fur would fluctuate in its tenacity according to the outside conditions, it would literally keep you warm as well as cool.

But too warm for our situation in africa.

So when you go skiing you wont get a tan because the snow reflects light (NEVER AT YOU) but always away back into the atmosphere.

It's also possible that they haven't been there very long.

You have to be literally in an area covered with soil to have any effect from the sun on your skin? I mean, me putting mylar in a grow room wont help, lets all take newbies advice and cover the walls in soil.

Increase light efficiency.

The "more" was an understatement. Snow reflects lots. Soil reflects little to none.

The way you term evolution - and the evolution you are talking about its just "change", why dont you just use this term instead of darwinist evolution and natural selection in our story?

Evolve sounds better to us egotistically because we see ourselves as the pinnacle of evolution. "Change" would mean that we're on an equal level with all the other animals and plants and organisms today. Who said scientists can't be egotistical?

Read this carefully, because sometimes it really does take the use of different fonts, bold and colours to make people understand.

I AM NOT A CREATIONIST

No one ever calls you a creationist except people who aren't actually involved the whole way through the discussion.

In what way can you call the viewpoint that intelligent design should not be ruled out as flawed? Evolution does not even rebuke intelligent design.

Nothing ever rules out ID. Just because it can't be ruled out, doesn't mean it should be considered as viable as evolution. One has proof (evolution or "change") and one is just a supposition.

What if your scientific evidence and all of your evolution evidence actually in the end supports intelligent design?

What if?

As I have said before, dont rule out intelligent design

You could be wrong.

If there was evidence, then it would no longer be nothing more than a supposition. But there's not.

The level of relationship between the thinking of creationism and religion is so intense that people will always refer to intelligent design as some kind of religious belief. But what about when you mention aliens or some other kind of being creating or even intervening in our path of evolution? That does not bring thoughts of religion.

When you mention aliens, you're just supposing. Coulda been boogy men, coulda been elves, coulda been magic, coulda been ghosts. Why mention the alternatives when they offer no more proof than any religion?

Newbie you dropped yourself in it here, I mean, with this silly equation your showing that orthodox human evolution (the one which says we evolved from rats into monkeys into humans etc etc) is as obvious as the existence of apples.

EVOLUTION = APPLES

what?

Do you understand now? After 5 posts of discussing this?

Do you get it?

This is your forumla and I have used it against you, I cant wait to see how you dig yourself out of this one.

We didn't evolve from monkeys. seriously. they were ape-like ancestors. There's nothing to dig out of because that equation needs to be juxtaposed with it's corresponding derivations.

Evolution is to eugenics as
Apples are to space alien ghost apple monsters

that's what the equal sign means. there's nothing to dig out of.

Oh and remember, I by no means disagree with the theory of evolution OR intelligent design, I simply wish to look at every angle and every question which can possibly be asked to be asked.

This is all.

I listen to any idea, but then I'll ask for the proof.

Questions.

Do you believe in evolution?
Do you believe in ID?
If you do believe in ID, do you make any personal suppositions?
If you were to explain ID as it relates to "how we got here", what would you say?

I dont see the point in any of you (Imitator, Delta, Newbie and others who clearly have not read the entire thread) actually argueing with me as if I am some creationist christian.

Read it a few times now. No one that you mentioned is calling you a creationist, we're just saying that your arguments greatly resemble a creationist arguments. "Like" is not analogous to "equal", like means "Similar but different"