So Old Yet So Modern

electroid

Active Member
Jun 5, 2006
47
3
33
✟7,683.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
10 points go to TemperateSeaIsland! electroid, you have zero points.

Why do these fish ;) swim so radically different from each other? Let electroid answer this time, please!
I'm not here to play games. You tell me because I could care less.
 
Upvote 0

TemperateSeaIsland

Mae hen wlad fy nhadau yn annwyl i mi
Aug 7, 2005
3,195
171
Wales, UK
✟21,785.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
What is this proving of macroevolution?

There is no proving in science, only evidence. As to how the movment of shark and dolphin spines relates to evolution, consider what evolution claims of shark and dolphin origins.
 
Upvote 0

TemperateSeaIsland

Mae hen wlad fy nhadau yn annwyl i mi
Aug 7, 2005
3,195
171
Wales, UK
✟21,785.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
10 points go to TemperateSeaIsland! electroid, you have zero points.

Why do these fish ;) swim so radically different from each other? Let electroid answer this time, please!

Sorry, couldn't help it... Was always the annoying kid with his hand up in class all the time. ;)
 
Upvote 0

OdwinOddball

Atheist Water Fowl
Jan 3, 2006
2,200
217
50
Birmingham, AL
✟22,544.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Erroneous and irrelevant. Sum null value. I have offered plenty of my own words that you are ignoring. You are commenting on my material outlining and not the material. You are doing so with vain endeavoring.

Your ability to string together multiple words you learned in vocabulary this morning is not impressing anyone young lady.

Drop the atttitude. Your OP had nothing to do with the Evolution/Creation debate. Your subsequent posts have shown that you have several gross miss understandings of the Theory of Evolution. When questioned on this you have dodged or posted other peoples words. Your own words have simply been a framework for these quotes.

You've been asked several questions that you have yet to answer. The answers you provide are germaine to the discussion, and will give us the ground work we all need to further this conversation.

You are the one who took this into the realm of snide, flipant remarks. You can return it to a real discssuion by demonstrating that you are actually posting about your own ideas and not just parroting someone elses.

To summarize:
What is evolution?
Define Micro Evolution and Macro Evolution.
Dolphins and sharks swim the same way, by wiggling their spines laterally. True or false? NM, this one was answered for you
Dolphins and Sharks are both fish. True or False?
 
Upvote 0

milkyway

Member
Jun 9, 2006
196
18
London
✟7,912.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Micro can be proven, whereas, macro cannot. Beginnings and endings are incomprehensible and any means of explaining them are outside our limits of understanding.
I didn't make myself clear. How do you define micro- and macroevolution to explain the difference between them?
 
Upvote 0

electroid

Active Member
Jun 5, 2006
47
3
33
✟7,683.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
Without looking at evidence we can't even tell if a murder took place at all. Find a body and try to figure out was it murdered? Look at it. Is there a bullet hole in the back? A knife in the front? Is there, to be short, any evidence that the person didn't die of natural causes?

Because, if there isn't, we won't look for a murderer. If there is, then we have to start gathering evidence to work out who the murderer was. And we don't randomly accuse people, unless we're really bad at this, we look for a suspect that the evidence tells us is guilty. It's a type of puzzle. Did this person die as a result of someone else's actions? If they did, then what happened?

The current diversity of life is a puzzle. Where did it all come from? So people, interested in the truth, went looking for evidence to explain that puzzle. Many of them were Christians, and many of those had a suspicion that the answer to that puzzle was found in Genesis, but when they gathered the evidence, they found Genesis wasn't supported by the evidence.

Evolution is supported by all available evidence.

And Darwin, as the initial prosecutor, started off with a killer case. But he hasn't been the only one. A lot of other people have joined in looking for a suspect and have gathered a lot more evidence than Darwin could have dreamed of. And even though Darwins case turned out to be pretty solid, solid enough to still be convincing, the new evidence is even more impressive. It's so good that we can even make guesses about what evidence we'll find in future, and so far even that is working. Darwin did the same, by the way, making a guess that there would be found a creatre with particular features. It was a type of moth, as I recall, and it was found after Darwin made his prediction.

If another explanation actually worked better, we'd have a new suspect. And if someone actually came up with a better explanation they'd be a certainty for a Nobel, the cash prize and assorted magazine covers. They'd also go down in history. So, with fame, fortune and not to mention the clearing evolution of it's 150+ years of being the only viable suspect, I've got to wonder why no one has managed to come up with something that better explains the evidence.

We have a "crime" in the diversity of life, and we have a "suspect" in evolution. Evolution is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt.


And, by the way, the origin of life isn't part of evolution. That's a seperate field, known as Abiogenesis. Evolution doesn't care where the life came from.
Since all the carbon 14 is gone in 50 thousand years, it certainly can’t be used by evolutionists to prove that dinosaurs lived 50 million years ago.
There would not be any carbon 14 left in the sample to measure. That’s why knowledgeable evolutionists never claim that carbon 14 is used to prove that dinosaurs lived 50 million years ago. But our high schools are apparently filled with kids who have been told by their science teachers that carbon dating proves dinosaurs are millions of years old.

There really is nothing more we need to say about this—but since we are on the subject let’s explore it further.

Is this your proof?
 
Upvote 0

c'mon sense

Active Member
Mar 18, 2005
316
16
41
✟15,528.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I'm not here to play games. You tell me because I could care less.

I'll do anything for a definition of evolution from you, in your own words.

Sharks are true fish and they swim just like fish, by lateral movements. Dolphins are mammals and, like all mammals originate on land. They swim like all mammals would swim, by moving their spines up and down, because they originate on land, like all mammals, where they got their ribcages.
 
Upvote 0

OdwinOddball

Atheist Water Fowl
Jan 3, 2006
2,200
217
50
Birmingham, AL
✟22,544.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat

Is this your proof?

Science doesn't do proof. Proof is for math and alcohol. Science is never 100%, it is simple the best explanation we have based on the evidence we have.

Again, you show why these questions are needed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

electroid

Active Member
Jun 5, 2006
47
3
33
✟7,683.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
I didn't make myself clear. How do you define micro- and macroevolution to explain the difference between them?
I don't have to explain it. I have dictionary references. It doesn't need redefined. I have the pure definition as do you. That is not why I refute macroevolutionist claims. I am not ignorant of their definitions and I'm also not ignorant of their theoretical and unscientific significance which is more than you can say.
 
Upvote 0

TemperateSeaIsland

Mae hen wlad fy nhadau yn annwyl i mi
Aug 7, 2005
3,195
171
Wales, UK
✟21,785.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I'll do anything for a definition of evolution from you, in your own words.

Sharks are true fish and they swim just like fish, by lateral movements. Dolphins are mammals and, like all mammals originate on land. They swim like all mammals would swim, by moving their spines up and down, because they originate on land, like all mammals, where they got their ribcages.

Bah, God just made them that way. :preach:
 
Upvote 0

Magnus Vile

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
2,507
212
✟11,190.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private

Is this your proof?

Who said anything about C14 dating? What has C14 dating got to do with anything I said? I already know that C14 is not a lot of good beyond 50,000 years. That's why we don't use it to date anything that old.

Do try to keep up. By now even the larger Creationist groups know that.



So, out of interest, is this your whole argument technique? Post chunks of text without ever actually responding to anything posted?
 
Upvote 0

Phred

Junior Mint
Aug 12, 2003
5,373
998
✟22,717.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Macroevolution cannot be "shown". It can only be "speculated" to have happened.
The only way "macroevolution" (speciation) cannot be shown is if you define it as a cow giving birth to a dolphin. No one else does.

Here you show your ignorance by relying upon these terms... terms which are simply arbitrary and usually used by creationists rather than scientists. But... since you insist upon using them we'd best define them. "Microevolution" is changes that occur within a population yet that population can still interbreed. "Macroevolution" is a change that happens within a population that prevents interbreeding. This is a simple distinction whose importance is very easily explained. Once interbreeding is not possible any changes that happen to one population cannot be spread to the other.

Since we've observed and documented both of these sorts of changes micro and macroevolution are fact.

There is no foundation for its occurrence but that of an old man's writing.
My my... what else comes to mind that this statement can be applied to... the Bible? The Constitution? Starting to feel irrelevant yet?

You're as faithful as the creationists. Welcome to reality.
Judging from your posts in this thread I don't think you know very much about reality and as such aren't qualified to welcome anyone.

You're a great creationist.

.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OdwinOddball

Atheist Water Fowl
Jan 3, 2006
2,200
217
50
Birmingham, AL
✟22,544.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't have to explain it. I have dictionary references. It doesn't need redefined. I have the pure definition as do you. That is not why I refute macroevolutionist claims. I am not ignorant of their definitions and I'm also not ignorant of their theoretical and unscientific significance which is more than you can say.

But we trust him because we know him, you are new here, we do not trust you. You SAY you know certain things, but when asked to explain it, you cannot produce your own explanations and must rely on somone elses. You are not giving us any reason to trust that you actually do understand it.

I'll give you a hint, the dictionary defintion of a word is not always the same as the scientific usage of a word. Dicitonaries are based on the current usage in the popular language. Science requires things to be much more accurate.

Hence the drastic difference between a theory in science and a theory in common usage.
 
Upvote 0

c'mon sense

Active Member
Mar 18, 2005
316
16
41
✟15,528.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I don't have to explain it. I have dictionary references. It doesn't need redefined. I have the pure definition as do you. That is not why I refute macroevolutionist claims. I am not ignorant of their definitions and I'm also not ignorant of their theoretical and unscientific significance which is more than you can say.
What was it... what was it... Ah! Proof! We want proof of that.

Unscientific significance? ^_^ Scientific insignifcance at best! But enlighten us, please!
 
Upvote 0

electroid

Active Member
Jun 5, 2006
47
3
33
✟7,683.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
The only way "macroevolution" (speciation) cannot be shown is if you define it as a cow giving birth to a dolphin. No one else does.

Here you show your ignorance by relying upon these terms... terms which are simply arbitrary and usually used by creationists rather than scientists. But... since you insist upon using them we'd best define them. "Microevolution" is changes that occur within a population yet that population can still interbreed. "Macroevolution" is a change that happens within a population that prevents interbreeding. This is a simple distinction whose importance is very easily explained. Once interbreeding is not possible any changes that happen to one population cannot be spread to the other.

Since we've observed and documented both of these sorts of changes micro and macroevolution are fact.

My my... what else comes to mind that this statement can be applied to... the Bible? The Constitution? Starting to feel irrelevant yet?

Judging from your posts in this thread I don't think you know very much about reality and as such aren't qualified to welcome anyone.

You're a great creationist.

.
I'm no longer creationist. I fall in and out as any person may agnostically.

Where is the observation and documentation for origin of species? And yes, that is essential to the macroevolution theory.

Where is the evidence? Darwin had none.
 
Upvote 0

milkyway

Member
Jun 9, 2006
196
18
London
✟7,912.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I don't have to explain it. I have dictionary references. It doesn't need redefined. I have the pure definition as do you. That is not why I refute macroevolutionist claims. I am not ignorant of their definitions and I'm also not ignorant of their theoretical and unscientific significance which is more than you can say.
I haven't said anything yet!!

All I did was ask you to explain the difference between mico- and macroevolution. Which you have been unable or unwilling to do.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums