|
Post by Charlie Minell on Mar 27, 2006 18:27:54 GMT -5
No problem Ryan! I just thought those questions were unnecessary in such a sensitive discussion but I understand that you didn't mean any offence. We'll see each other in the other section instead were I probably should stay! Peace! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 27, 2006 18:48:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 27, 2006 19:16:23 GMT -5
i think what engin is trying to say....is those "stages" are based on false information....there is absolutly no scientific proof that they are what they say they are.....several of the stages are and have been proven to be a hoax
|
|
|
Post by gambit on Mar 27, 2006 19:19:54 GMT -5
i think what engin is trying to say....is those "stages" are based on false information....there is absolutly no scientific proof that they are what they say they are.....several of the stages are and have been proven to be a hoax Like your armwrestling talents/skills...
|
|
|
Post by CHARLES WARMACK on Mar 27, 2006 22:55:42 GMT -5
I'm not going to change my pic, snookums
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 10:53:39 GMT -5
Engin soory if u felt offended, my question to all who dispell the evolutionary process is this if we didnt have evolution then how'd we come from primative creatures to the advanced technological society we are today. look at all the advancements that have occured just since the mid fifties till now.
To Ryan i ask this you stated"i think what engin is trying to say....is those "stages" are based on false information....there is absolutly no scientific proof that they are what they say they are.....several of the stages are and have been proven to be a hoax so my question is cant your precious little bible be condiered in the same boat. I am fully capable of questioning the bible because like you said its based on false evidence, there is no religous prove to what the bible says about what happened, its false information recorded by MAN who claim to be inspired by god and there fore can easily be considered a hoax as well.
JMO
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 28, 2006 11:04:41 GMT -5
the bible is a historical book....how can you say that it isnt?
it is 66 books that were written over a period of 1500 years, written by men from different cultures, time periods and socail status.
there is sooo much historical proof to back it up.....give a story that think is a hoax and lets discuss it...
you said "my question to all who dispell the evolutionary process is this if we didnt have evolution then how'd we come from primative creatures to the advanced technological society we are today. look at all the advancements that have occured just since the mid fifties till now."
this doesnt make since.....if evolution didnt occur than that means there is no primitive life form that we evolved from.....your statement is contradictory in itself.
What advancments from the fifties? technology? Man has access due to recorded information, of much information. more information than they had 2000 years ago....this is not proof of evolution...man is not anymore intelligent, just has more information.
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 11:19:39 GMT -5
an examlpe of a historical hoax, how about the walking on water story, are you kidding me ryan, its scientifically immopsible for man to walk on water, we displace too much water and sink if you've ever tried it. or how abut the conception of jesus, sorry my friend but artifical insemination didn exist back then , so either she wasn't a virgin or somebody lied somewhere.
If you have more information on things doesn't that make you more resourseful therefore making you more intelligent? Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely... Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]
And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6]
evolution exists today and always existed sorry to be the one to tell you that...
how about the the evolution of one bacterial viruse evolviong into a stronger and more deadly viruse...theres one form of evolution do u want more
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 11:22:02 GMT -5
DNA 'n evolution
Just as nature has "recycled" limb structures and the backbone, a similar parsimony exists on the molecular level. DNA, the "memory chemical" that stores genetic information, comprises the genes of every living organism.
The upshot of the analysis is this, says Goodenough: "The fact that the same kinds of genes are found in all the different kinds of organisms on the planet today, including both bacteria and organisms like ourselves, indicates that these genes developed long ago." To put it slightly differently, the presence of similar or identical genes in two organisms is a genetic fingerprint of a common ancestor at some time in the past.
Bring on the biochemistry The detailed science of fingering common ancestors and figuring out how their descendants are related is complicated stuff, way beyond The Why Files's powers of comprehension. But the essential technique is obvious to anyone who has played telephone. You remember: You sit in a circle and whisper a phrase into your neighbor's ear, who then passes the phrase along. When the phrase returns to its starting point, "A pox on both your houses," may be transmogrified into, say, "A box of genes in both kinds of louses."
Obviously, the further you are from the origin, the more distorted the phrase will be (although if you are clever in sorting out the phonemes and the rhymes, you can deduce how the two sentences are related and how they were changed while being passed around).
In their shiny labs and clean white coats, this is essentially what the genetic sleuths do. They look for similarities and differences among genes in modern organisms, then try to deduce when they shared a common ancestor.
While taxonomists traditionally analyzed relationships among organisms in terms of shared features, say wings or scales, genetic analysts measure relationships by calculating time to a common ancestor.
In a game of telephone, we might observe that each player averages one more mistaken syllable. In an evolutionary study, we might find that one "letter" of the genetic code changed per million years of evolution. If five "letters" differed between two organisms, we could deduce that they had diverged five million years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 11:23:33 GMT -5
Fossil Evidence Of Worms Over One Billion Years Old Reported In Science Washington D.C. -- Researchers have discovered what appears to be evidence of worm-like animals in rocks that are over 1 billion years old--about twice as old as any other evidence for multicellular life yet discovered. These findings add a new perspective to the origination of multicellular animals, typically thought to have begun with a sudden explosion during the early Cambrian period, about 540 million years ago. The study will be published in the 2 October issue of Science.
Researchers from the University of Tübingen and Yale University, as well as Jadavpur University in Calcutta, have found tunnels that may be burrows left behind as ancient worm-like animals wriggled through sand beds underneath a shallow sea covering what is now Central India. These structures, known as "trace fossils," were preserved when the beds solidified into rock 1.1 billion years ago. Before this discovery, the oldest known fossil evidence of multicellular animals was 580 million years old.
The Cambrian is often thought to have been the "big bang" of animal evolution, a time when a wide variety of organisms originated and left their mark on the fossil record. An important argument for this model of evolution has been that no multicellular organisms have been found in rocks older than the Cambrian. However, some molecular studies have suggested that soft-bodied animals arose well before the Cambrian, perhaps as much as 1 billion years ago. The new findings, reported by Adolf Seilacher and his colleagues, add to the body of evidence suggesting that the diversification of animal designs experienced a "slow burn" before the Cambrian explosion.
The trace fossils are preserved in the Chorhat Sandstone, which contains sand beds that built up during storms. The tops of many sand beds were covered with a microbial mat that blanketed the floor periodically and protected the sand below from any disturbances above. The ancient worm-like animals may have migrated through the sand just below the mats, using them as a source for food and oxygen since the water within the sand layers was probably "reduced," or poor in oxygen.
An important and often controversial consideration for researchers analyzing trace fossils is that physical processes can create patterns in sedimentary rocks that look very similar to tracks left behind by animals. According to Seilacher and his colleagues, the Chorhat findings are best explained as the products of burrowing animals. For example, the diameters vary from tunnel to tunnel but remain constant along each individual tunnel. The tunnels also do not resemble the structures commonly caused by physical processes and are similar to younger trace fossils known to be produced by triploblastic animals (animals that developed from an embryo and that contain three outer membranes, as do worms).
The authors note in their paper that the existence of worm-like animals so much earlier than the Cambrian period would suggest that "animal body plans changed very little before the explosive emergence of new designs in the Precambrian/Cambrian transition and the onset of an arms-race style of Darwinian evolution."
you wanted proof here it is, gime some religical proof............
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 28, 2006 11:30:30 GMT -5
do you honestly think im readin all that?
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 11:49:09 GMT -5
maybe u should it might expand your knowledge and possibly open up new thoughts and ideas
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 28, 2006 12:08:59 GMT -5
an examlpe of a historical hoax, how about the walking on water story, are you kidding me ryan, its scientifically immopsible for man to walk on water, we displace too much water and sink if you've ever tried it. or how abut the conception of jesus, sorry my friend but artifical insemination didn exist back then , so either she wasn't a virgin or somebody lied somewhere. well..my overly intellegent friend.....you are forgetting the God factor.....if God is real then these things are possible.....to disprove either action you must first disprove the existance of God....and you cant do that. So....that was your first paragraph if it can tget more itelligent than that the rest is a waste of cyberspace
|
|
|
Post by Ty Kissner on Mar 28, 2006 12:19:40 GMT -5
you cant prove gods existence either. to prove either action you have to prove his existence and you cant do that can you.
maybe now you should continue reading
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Mar 28, 2006 16:47:56 GMT -5
the bible says that all creation declares the glory of God.
how about the statement you made "what about the technological advancment"
This comment proves the validity of the bible as the bible prophecied the expansion of knowledge......up intill the 1800's the world operated approxamatly in the same measure of thechnology that it has for thousands of years. But in the 1900's things blew up....literally
daniel 12:4. But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
|
|