-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The evidence for Evolution.
- Thread starter In situ
- Start date
There are plenty of them, but darn it, it's such a slow process, it just so happens we can't see it.
And any past transitions are lost in time so, oh darn again, just so happens we cannot see that either.
What we can see is a magnificent creation and all it's wonders that was created in seven days. And nope, I didn't see it happen, but the creation explanation beats the heck out of, "it just happened, then evolved". Gods creation is amazing enough but for little or nothing to be smart enough to end up where we are today boggles the mind, and for good reason.
BTW, where did little or nothing get such an education? How did it learn to do such amazing things...things that are still a mystery to us?
That isn't really directed at you, UC, I just couldn't resist the opportunity.
Upvote
0
TagliatelliMonster
Well-Known Member
The observable and verifiable nested hierarchy in all life is a fact, not an opinion.
It also isn't an opinion that we are perfectly able to take two DNA strings, compare them and determine relational kinship and ancestry.
These things are genetics facts, not opinions.
That's again not an opinion. It's a fact of anatomy.
The lower back pain problems that 70% of humans are confronted with, are directly related to the sub-optimal design of our spine for bipedalism.
Which makes perfect sense in context of our evolutionary history. While it makes zero sense if humans were designed from the ground up for bipedalism.
You mean like.... biologists, geneticists, doctors, anthropologists, etc?
Yeah, they are "so stupid" and they "have no idea what they are talking about".
They should all just listen to you, a random layman on the interwebs, instead...
Upvote
0
And?
I guess the structure of my body in the area where laughter makes me sore. is not designed for laughter? So please...stop it.
BTW, didn't I ask before about why our feet get sore from standing? Does that mean we aren't designed to stand and maybe walk on all fours or even be aqua men? Or maybe we are still in the process and eventually our feet will evolve bigger to withstand the weight? Yeah... yeah, that's it.
So what are you saying, these people are untouchable and should not be questioned? Is that how you come to your way of thinking on all this...they are smarter than you so you follow without question? Actually, that makes perfect sense.
Does that usually get the desired result? Does it really make people feel ashamed for saying those people are wrong? I ask because y'all keep using it, and I was just wondering if others can see through it as well and you just never learn or if they can't see through it and it works for you?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
TagliatelliMonster
Well-Known Member
And nothing.... just that these things are facts, not opinions as you claimed.
/facepalm
Count on a creationist, to argue against the facts.
The denial is strong, in this one...
No, that's not at all what I'm saying.
It's not an argument from authority. It's an argument from expertise.
When 20 doctors tell me that I have a cancer, and my garagists then tells me that they are all wrong, should I believe the 20 doctors, or my garagist?
However, my garagist is more then welcome to question the 20 doctors. But he'll be required to bring actual valid arguments. Merely declaring that they are wrong, will not cut it. But let's be realistic... my garagist is not going to know better then those 20 doctors, wouldn't you agree?
Likewise, you don't know better then 99.99% of all scientists remotely related to the field of biology.
Not "smarter" but "more knowledgeable".
And no, it's not without question. It's through understanding after they did the heavy lifting.
Tell you what... next time you are sick, go see your garagist instead of your doctor, and see if your logic still holds up.
Upvote
0
Show me were I said those thing were not facts? You twisted that one into reality. But see how you stretched things around to draw that conclusion? that helps me make a point.
20 Doctors telling me I have cancer or not are one thing, they have no reason to lie and they are talking about provable definite things they know for a fact. Something that they are past the pioneering stage with. Cut and dry.
Evolution and such is a completely different subject and deals with the unknown, with a lot of guesswork and unproven theory/opinion, where something can be said to mean something it doesn't and just because they say it does, or the only thing backing it is could be's. Also, just as your agenda led you to do the twist there, so too can theirs. They will often draw the conclusion they wish to draw. Your comparison there is simply not realistic.
Upvote
0
If you want to pretend the obvious interpretation is something other than it is, fine, but I don't buy the very old "interpretation" argument. Some things in the Bible are clear and that is one of them. If you want to make it confusing so you can have your cake and eat it too, as in say you believe in God but not his word or not all of it because you would rather go with the worlds explanation on certain things, that is up to you but it's just not the way I want to go.
If I went that route, there would be no way to discern what part of the Bible I should believe and what part I should believe the worlds opinion on how things took place. Remember, he is not a God of confusion and that would bring on mass confusion of the whole bible. no, think I'll stick with what I have.
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart,
And lean not on your own understanding;"
Upvote
0
TagliatelliMonster
Well-Known Member
Ok:
"My" evidence, consists of those facts. They aren't opinions. They are facts.
I didn't have to "stretch" anything. You flat out said that the things I put forward as evidence are mere opinions. But they aren't. They are facts.
Neither do the scientists that work in the field of comparative anatomy, genetics, etc etc etc.
In fact... lying is a very efficient way for them to torpedo their carreers as scientists.
So do the scientists who study the anatomy of animals.
It's not. Evolution is a widely accept and extremely solid model of biology. It's sometimes even refered to as the "unified field theory of biology".
It's SO solid that people like Francis Collins, devout christians, say that "nothing in biology makes sense, except in context of evolution".
I guess this christian is a liar to, in your layman opinion?
No, evolution and its aspects are pretty well known.
Nope. Rather: solid, verifiable and testable models of reality that are so well-evidenced that "no reasonable person could rationally question it" (=words of Francis Collins, head of the human genome project and, again, devout christian).
Such as? Or is this another one of your accusations where you "don't recall" what it was about?
What agenda?
Whose?
Ask your licenced doctor, how realistic it is.
Upvote
0
TagliatelliMonster
Well-Known Member
The central theme of this post is the following:
I don't care about evidence. I don't care about facts. I don't care about what explanations are verifiably sensible and which aren't.
All I care about is what the bible says, and if reality disagrees with the bible - I'll go with the bible.
You know... it's fine if you wish to think like that off course...
But please, then don't pretend as if your objections to things like evolution theory have anything at all to do with the evidence in support of it or the sciences overall that concluded it, because clearly that is not the case.
It's painfully clear from what you wrote above that evidence and rational reasoning is of no consequence in your beliefs. Your beliefs are what they are because of what you read in your precious book - and they have nothing to do with the facts and data of reality.
It is very clear from this section of your post above:
...you believe in God but not his word or not all of it because you would rather go with the worlds explanation on certain things, that is up to you but it's just not the way I want to go.
See? It's not at all about the actual evidence and facts, as far as you are concerned. Rather, to you, it is about that which you want to believe. And as you said, you want to believe the bible.
Great. But then just be honest about that.
Personally, I think AV is an irrational fundamentalist. But you have got to respect his brutal honesty. He flat out admits that he thinks this way: if reality disagrees with the bible, then reality can "take a hike" as far as he is concerned.
Just be honest about it and join his club. But don't pretend as if you have a problem with the actual theory of evolution or with the evidence in support of it. Clearly that isn't true. The only problem you have with it, is that it doesn't agree with your particular interpretation of your sacred book.
Upvote
0
First I've heard about that. So we are clear, lets step back a bit...what exactly is your evidence for evolution? If you want to go with what you just mentioned, how is that evidence? Or however you choose to answer is fine, just as long as you can show evolution is a fact.
On the other stuff, you just aren't going to convince me they are anywhere near the same. Again one is proven fact and I've yet to see any proof for evolution. Huge difference. As a matter of fact, it's getting tough to take you seriously now when you try to convince me of such things, but for the moment, I'm going to try.
Upvote
0
Simply untrue, but just what I would expect of you. If I didn't care I would have asked you to show me some evidence, some fact, something other than opinion?
I'll give you a few minutes to get that all together for me. And bring it here, don't just send me somewhere to read something and automatically see it as you do.
Upvote
0
Fossils are known. The genomes of living species are known. The morphology of living species is known. What in the world are you talking about when you say that evolution deals with the unknown? Evolution deals with nothing but the known, and that known is the diversity of the fossil and species we see. Evolution deals with the observed mechanisms of mutation, speciation, and natural selection, to name a few. Evolution is based on tested hypotheses. You really need to open your eyes to the real science.
If you think I am wrong, then check out these 29 tests that evolution has passed:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Upvote
0
We can start with endogenous retroviruses.
Endogenous retroviruses, or ERVs, are the product of exogenous retroviruses inserting (i.e. integrating) into the host genome. Once they insert into the host species' genome their viral genomes are transcribed and translated to produce new viruses that go on to infect other cells.
We can also observe where retroviruses insert into the host genome. As it turns out, they insert all over the place. A study looking at the retroviruses MLV, ASLV, and HIV they found that they inserted all throughout the human genome. Here is a map of the insertions they mapped in the human genome:
"Relationship between Integration Sites and Transcriptional Intensity in the Human Genome
The human chromosomes are shown numbered. HIV integration sites from all datasets in Table 1 are shown as blue “lollipops”; MLV integration sites are shown in lavender; and ASLV integration sites are shown in green. Transcriptional activity is shown by the red shading on each of the chromosomes (derived from quantification of nonnormalized EST libraries, see text). Centromeres, which are mostly unsequenced, are shown as grey rectangles."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/15314653/
With me so far?
Upvote
0
Have you honestly convinced yourself you are an Einstein? lol
Now explain exactly how that proves evolution is no doubt a fact.
Upvote
0
TagliatelliMonster
Well-Known Member
Common ancestry of life is a genetic fact. This is demonstrated by the nested structure or DNA.
Evolution theory is the mechanism (= essentially mutate, survive, breed, repeat) by which this occured.
Don't joke. Nothing will convince you. You made that very clear with your post concerning how you "want" to believe a literal interpretation the bible and how the evidence of reality isn't going to stand in your way of believing a literal interpretation of the bible.
The fact of nested hierarchies, of phylogenies IS the fact of common ancestry.
It's how we can determine that your mom and dad are your biological mom and dad.
You mean, it is tough to take me seriously, when all you care about is believing a literal interpretation of the bible...
This seems like a good moment to ask you a specific question...
What would convince you? Is there anything that could convince you?
Be honest now...
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Locked
