A challenge, to a people who use their intellect.

Status
Not open for further replies.

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
Ok, first of all. All of you who call themselves 'theistic evolutionists' shoudl be ashamed. Why? Because you're compromising your faith to make "scientific" facts fit with your creed.

If you only but knew how unscientific the Theory of Evolution is. I challenge any evolutionist, secular or theist to show me proof of this. With the help of God Almighty, my aim is to show you that SCIENCE PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, without having to accept fairy tales like Evolution, and Social Darwinism. (which combined, have brought nothing but misery and hate to mankind)

Humanity has existed for a long time without science, and relied on superstitious beliefs regarding the Universe and God. The first scientists, in the proper sense of the word, were the Muslims the 9th->14th century AD. Their strong belief in the One God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus drove them to explore God's creation in hopes of understanding him more. That knowledge was then transmitted to the Europeans during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment in the 16th and 17th century. (check any history book)

However due to social stresses and changing economic conditions...science, and every other sphere of life, were seperated from the Church, this unfortunetly lead to people believing that science cannot be reconciled with religion. Whereas our brothers in faith, the Muslims were able to marry science and religion to actually prove that God is real. And that the only way to know God is through reason. Blind faith is not acceptable.

So keeping this in mind. Let's talk! Why do you think we've evolved? If God is the ultimate perfection and He has created everything, and He sustains everything at every moment in time and space, why would he make His creation get better with time when it is obviously DESIGNED to do its purpose from the beginning.

I have many proofs and ideas to share and am anxious to hear from the rest of your beautiful minds.

Peace unto you.
M.
 

platzapS

Expanding Mind
Nov 12, 2002
3,572
300
33
Sunshine State
Visit site
✟5,263.00
Faith
Humanist
Ok, first of all. All of you who call themselves 'theistic evolutionists' shoudl be ashamed. Why? Because you're compromising your faith to make "scientific" facts fit with your creed.

I am a theistic evolutionist. I am not compromising my religion. The Apostle's Creed doesn't say that you must believe in a literal version of Genesis.

If you only but knew how unscientific the Theory of Evolution is. I challenge any evolutionist, secular or theist to show me proof of this. With the help of God Almighty, my aim is to show you that SCIENCE PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, without having to accept fairy tales like Evolution, and Social Darwinism. (which combined, have brought nothing but misery and hate to mankind)

The validity of evolution is disucussed on dozens of threads here. If you have evidence against evolution, my friends here would love to discuss it with you. Science is not meant to prove the existence of God, or other supernatural phenomena. Science is only meant to discover truths about the physical universe. Theistic evolutionists may or may not support a "survival of the fittest" outlook on society, but all accept biological evolution.

The acceptence of evolution has not brought any more misery and hate to this world than Christianity has (Crusades, Inquistion...). Does that mean Christianity is wrong? No, it means that some people have used a perversed definition of it to justify bad things. The same thing happens with evolution. All scientific theories are morally neutral.

So keeping this in mind. Let's talk! Why do you think we've evolved? If God is the ultimate perfection and He has created everything, and He sustains everything at every moment in time and space, why would he make His creation get better with time when it is obviously DESIGNED to do its purpose from the beginning.

I think we have evolved because the most current theories in science point to this fact. The true religion (IMO), Christianity, will always "fit" with true science (evolution).
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
mo.mentum said:
Ok, first of all. All of you who call themselves 'theistic evolutionists' shoudl be ashamed. Why? Because you're compromising your faith to make "scientific" facts fit with your creed.
My faith is not compromised whatsoever because of evolution. It is in fact strengthened enormously by the fact that my idea of how God created actually fits the evidence.

If you only but knew how unscientific the Theory of Evolution is.
This shows you have done no research into the field at all. If you would see the time and effort placed into meticulously catagorizing fossils, measuring bone lengths, looking at derived characteristics, and then putting all this together in a cladistic analysis, you would stop calling it unscientific.

I challenge any evolutionist, secular or theist to show me proof of this.
Show you proof of what?

With the help of God Almighty, my aim is to show you that SCIENCE PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
We all already believe in God. If you feel like preaching to the heathen masses ;) , there's a non-Christians allowed forum. Go there.

without having to accept fairy tales like Evolution, and Social Darwinism. (which combined, have brought nothing but misery and hate to mankind)
How would the misery Social Darwinism (Biological evolution has brought civilized man no misery, except the occasional misguided Creationist who realizes evolution happens) have anything to do with the validity of evolutionary theory? Tell me. How would 19th century business moguls using unfair tactics to force people out of business disprove the fact that we share a common ancestor with apes? How would mass genocide (assuming social darwinism was its cause, which it wasn't) disprove the fact that birds are very highly derived dinosaurs?

However due to social stresses and changing economic conditions...science, and every other sphere of life, were seperated from the Church
A global flood was falsified back when science and religion were still "married".

this unfortunetly lead to people believing that science cannot be reconciled with religion.
Funny, isn't that what your second sentence was trying to say?

Whereas our brothers in faith, the Muslims were able to marry science and religion to actually prove that God is real. And that the only way to know God is through reason. Blind faith is not acceptable.
Yes, and look at all the great scientific advances that have come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 years. The record player, the lightbulb, the radio, the combustable engine, nuclear fission, jet and stealth technology, satellites, laser guided munitions, television, and.... oh wait.... nothing has come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 years. And you want to adopt their approach to science?

So keeping this in mind. Let's talk! Why do you think we've evolved?
Because all other theories regarding life's diversification have been falsified.

If God is the ultimate perfection and He has created everything, and He sustains everything at every moment in time and space, why would he make His creation get better with time when it is obviously DESIGNED to do its purpose from the beginning.
If God is the ultimate perfection, why would he riddle the genomes of his creations with pseudo-genes and non-functional genes? But, in an answer to your question, I like to think that God wanted us to have a great history of life on earth for us to study and unravel.
 
Upvote 0

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
platzapS said:
The acceptence of evolution has not brought any more misery and hate to this world than Christianity has (Crusades, Inquistion...). Does that mean Christianity is wrong? No, it means that some people have used a perversed definition of it to justify bad things. The same thing happens with evolution. All scientific theories are morally neutral.

Not true. The basis of Nazism and Facism is evolution. Read up on it. The theory itself is neutral, but a belief in it leads people to think of themselves as superior, or that their race is meant to dominate all others. The British used it as justification for an ever expanding empire. The French used it in the "Civilizing Missions". The Nazis wiped out entire groups because they thought they were inferior. Fascism wants to do away with all those who are different because they are not "elite". Even Communism has evolutionary thinking behind it. Karl Marx was an avid admirer of Darwin. He dedicated "Das Kapital" to Darwin, as he saw the struggle of the proletariat against the capitalist as a survival of the fittest kind of thing.
 
Upvote 0

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
troodon said:
A global flood was falsified back when science and religion were still "married".

Funny, isn't that what your second sentence was trying to say?

Yes, and look at all the great scientific advances that have come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 years. The record player, the lightbulb, the radio, the combustable engine, nuclear fission, jet and stealth technology, satellites, laser guided munitions, television, and.... oh wait.... nothing has come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 years. And you want to adopt their approach to science?

Don't be a bigot :) First off, the flood doesn't necessarily imply "global". Just like all punishments were brought to bear on a certain nation. (Sodom through Lot, Pharoh through Moses), the people of Noah were punished by a flood, not all of Earth. But it could interpreted both ways.

As for Islam, DUH! DUH! DUH! Islam has been dormant for the last 300 years. You honestly think Islam is what is being practiced today? Come on, read up on history. You are right, nothing of value has come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 even 300 years, but look at its scientific history from the 7th to 15th century and you will change your mind. All I'm saying is that for almost a millenia, Muslim scientists were driven to explore the physical world as a manifestation of God's perfect creation that needs to be understood to understand God's attributes, since He cannot be comprehended directly.

Anyway, look up their history of science, i myself was amazed :) It's important to give credit where credit is due. Westen science has been at the forefront for the last 400 years or so, but before that it was the Arabs, and before them the Greeks. Knowledge is not exclusive, it is passed down. The only reason we had a Renaissance in Europe it's thanks to exchanges of ideas with the Muslim empire that was present in Spain for 700 years until 1492.


troodon said:
If God is the ultimate perfection, why would he riddle the genomes of his creations with pseudo-genes and non-functional genes? But, in an answer to your question, I like to think that God wanted us to have a great history of life on earth for us to study and unravel.

Aaah! You bring a good point, and there's an answer to this that is very simple. All this "garbage DNA" is turning out to be useful or just deactived. If you've done any computer programming, you could see how this is logical. We are a computer programmed written in DNA code. Since all life is using that same code, not all of it applies to everyone. So some of it will be disabled or active. Logic, yes yes?

All I'm trying to get at really is that God is limitless and his wisdom and power are expressed through His creation. He is in the details. The physical world was spread about for us to explore and wonder at his might.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,745
64
Massachusetts
✟339,453.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
mo.mentum said:
Ok, first of all. All of you who call themselves 'theistic evolutionists' shoudl be ashamed. Why? Because you're compromising your faith to make "scientific" facts fit with your creed.
I like my faith to reflect reality. That means it has to be consistent with evolution.

If you only but knew how unscientific the Theory of Evolution is.
I know very well how scienntific the theory of evolution is, since I use it to do science every day. Evolution is the only explanation available for a vast range of biological data, including the data in my own field, human genetics. Since that's the case, it would be kind of silly of me to pretend that it's invalid.
 
Upvote 0

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
sfs said:
Evolution is the only explanation available for a vast range of biological data, including the data in my own field, human genetics. Since that's the case, it would be kind of silly of me to pretend that it's invalid.

Oh? I always wanted a professional to answer this question for me. Well then, if Evilution is the only available explanation, it must have way to explain the sperm cell.

Let's examine it shall we?

First of all, the sperm is produced in your testicles along an assembly line about 500m long. Each component of the sperm are brought together and built. Briefly, these consist of the tail, the engine, the head.

The tail is a perfect locomotive organelle for the environment needed, it can provide the sperm with speeds the equivalent of a speed boat.

The engine is designed to run on fructose which, oh my God, happens to be present in the seminal fluids.

The head has 2 layers of armor, and a sack of enzymes to help it borrow into the egg cell.

Each layer of armor is used up at progressive stages as it borrows, revealing the enzymes beneath when the time is right. Eventually, the DNA cargo within is also exposed after the layers of armor are worn off.

Also, the tail suddenly breaks off. If it didn't, the constant motion would destroy the egg cell internally.

Let's not forget that the environment the sperm are released into is highly acidic and hostile. Yet the seminal fluid ejected with them contains a base solution to counter this.

To track the egg, the sperms have chemical sensors that detect hormones released by the egg.

Despite the fact that no sperm, in the entire history of sperm had the opportunity to visit this environment, get back into the male body and report what it saw.

If this system was not fully functional from day 1, then no species would have procreated. There is no trial and error, there is no slow development.

How did our testicles learn how to build the sperm's armor, and it's engine and to make it run on fructose.

These are serious questions that cannot be answered with genetics. But if you can, please do!

I presented a brief outline of the complexity of this process. But every other function in our bodies or any other biological system is just as complex yet harmonious, and if any part were to be removed, the whole system would break apart.
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
mo.mentum said:
The theory itself is neutral, but a belief in it leads people to think of themselves as superior, or that their race is meant to dominate all others.
The exact same could be said of special creation, why do you think Africans were treaded as sub-human prior to the publishing of Origin of Species? Also, common descent can be used as a very nice argument against hate (check these song lyrics. Also, since you agree that evolution's possible psychological effect on people has no bearing on its validity, why are you bringing it up?

The British used it as justification for an ever expanding empire.
The British empire was had almost attained its farthest extent by the time Origin had been published.

Don't be a bigot :)
I hope that smilie indicates a joke :)

First off, the flood doesn't necessarily imply "global". Just like all punishments were brought to bear on a certain nation. (Sodom through Lot, Pharoh through Moses), the people of Noah were punished by a flood, not all of Earth. But it could interpreted both ways.
Well, a global flood is used as a YEC excuse for the fossil record (as poor as it may be of an excuse ;) ). To make it un-global is to take away any YEC responce to the world's geology, which is something I'm guessing (I could be wrong) you don't want. I agree that the story of Noah is based on a local flood; although I doubt God had anything to do with said flood.

As for Islam, DUH! DUH! DUH! Islam has been dormant for the last 300 years.... you are right, nothing of value has come out of the Islamic world in the last 150 even 300 years
Your argument was that science including God benefitted the science of Islam. I was pointing out that since God was 'taken out of science' (which I assume you would place around the year 1859) the Western world has made fantastic strides in science whereas the Islamic world has been left in the dust.

You honestly think Islam is what is being practiced today?
Umm... yes I would say that the world's Muslims practice Islam.

Islam has been dormant for the last 300 years.... but look at its scientific history from the 7th to 15th century and you will change your mind. All I'm saying is that for almost a millenia, Muslim scientists were driven to explore the physical world as a manifestation of God's perfect creation that needs to be understood to understand God's attributes, since He cannot be comprehended directly.

Anyway, look up their history of science, i myself was amazed :) It's important to give credit where credit is due.
You are very correct. Muslim thinkers have gave humanity many great gifts for quite a while but this was not necessarily because they were 'closer to God' or something than Europeans. The Catholic Church (Christianity at the time) controlled virtually everything during that time period and yet Europeans were outpaced by the Arabs. This wasn't because of a different perspective on the world (Europeans were YECs at the time as well) but because Europeans were basically oppressed to a further to degree and existed in a world where the only science that mattered was that applied to war. Oppressive war mongering people who constantly battle each other over petty squabbles (aka Europeans during the middle ages) are not going to be good at developing optics, advanced medicine, and a better numeral system.

Westen science has been at the forefront for the last 400 years or so, but before that it was the Arabs, and before them the Greeks. Knowledge is not exclusive, it is passed down. The only reason we had a Renaissance in Europe it's thanks to exchanges of ideas with the Muslim empire that was present in Spain for 700 years until 1492.
Yes, all very true, but none of this has to do with the Muslims of the time being YECs. Europeans were to, look where it got them.

Aaah! You bring a good point, and there's an answer to this that is very simple. All this "garbage DNA" is turning out to be useful or just deactived. If you've done any computer programming, you could see how this is logical. We are a computer programmed written in DNA code. Since all life is using that same code, not all of it applies to everyone. So some of it will be disabled or active. Logic, yes yes?
If you've got an explanation as to what the pseudogene version of the ψη-globin gene does in a human I would love to hear it.

Also, even if all pseudogenes have a purpose, you still forgot about the "non-functional genes" I alluded to. These would include the genes humans have for a tail and the genes whales have for hind limbs; detailed here. There are only two possibilities for these structures; either the proper mutation occured to create a brand new gene to create the structure (sounds like a whole lot of new information to me) or there is a gene for the structure present in the organism's genome and it is normally covered up by a dominant gene. So, the question arises, why did God insert these genes into the genomes of "perfect" organisms.

All I'm trying to get at really is that God is limitless and his wisdom and power are expressed through His creation. He is in the details. The physical world was spread about for us to explore and wonder at his might.
Everything I see, touch, smell, and taste was created by God, correct, but only in the sense that He created the matter and energy that make up what I see, touch, smell, and taste.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,745
64
Massachusetts
✟339,453.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
mo.mentum said:
Oh? I always wanted a professional to answer this question for me. Well then, if Evilution is the only available explanation, it must have way to explain the sperm cell.

Sorry, the evolution of sperm is not a topic for human genetics: all the key components of sperm were in place long before humans appeared on the scene. Human genetics deals with genetic differences between different people and between humans and our closest relatives. There is no creationist model for human genetics.

If you were really interested in understanding how sperm might have evolved, the first thing you would do would be to start studying the different types of sperm cells present in living organisms. If you had done that, you would have found that your argument is badly flawed. You claim that sperm could not function without all of their components in place, and yet there are sperm cells that lack many of those components. Nematode sperm, for example, don't have tails, and the sperm of many sea animals lack a protective seminal fluid. Other components are common to many kinds of cells (enzymes, chemical sensing ability), and would have been in place before sperm cells started to specialize.
 
Upvote 0

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
The exact same could be said of special creation, why do you think Africans were treaded as sub-human prior to the publishing of Origin of Species?

Simple, it's called a "white man's burden". They saw themselves as civilizing the world. Origins only added justification to this reasoning.


Well, a global flood is used as a YEC excuse for the fossil record (as poor as it may be of an excuse ;) ). To make it un-global is to take away any YEC responce to the world's geology, which is something I'm guessing (I could be wrong) you don't want. I agree that the story of Noah is based on a local flood; although I doubt God had anything to do with said flood.

What is YEC? :) And i want to make the flood unglobal. Then it would fit the pattern of other punishments God brought down on rebellious people. Why would Noah's people be honored with a global flodo and have all humanity wiped out because of their evil? Doesn't make sense if God is Infinitely Just and Merciful.


Everything I see, touch, smell, and taste was created by God, correct, but only in the sense that He created the matter and energy that make up what I see, touch, smell, and taste.

Here lies a misconception about God. Many poeple see Him as the Creator and that's it. He set the wheels in motion and let the whole thing run its own course. This is simply not true. God created time and space and is not bound by them. Every moment of time is created. Creation is an ongoing process. He is the Sustainer of the world not just the Creator. At every instant, He destroys and created the world, like frames from a movie.
 
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

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
sfs said:
Sorry, the evolution of sperm is not a topic for human genetics: all the key components of sperm were in place long before humans appeared on the scene. Human genetics deals with genetic differences between different people and between humans and our closest relatives. There is no creationist model for human genetics.

How long will scientist marvel and the perfect machine which is the human body? They say chimps and humans are the closest relatives, yet they are only 99.9% similar. That 0.1% of BILLIONS of genes makes a big difference. We're not that much alike.


sfs said:
Nematode sperm, for example, don't have tails, and the sperm of many sea animals lack a protective seminal fluid. Other components are common to many kinds of cells (enzymes, chemical sensing ability), and would have been in place before sperm cells started to specialize.

Nematode sperm doesn't need tails because it's released directly onto the females eggs. Human sperm needs to find it. I just want to have someone plainly explain to me how mammals differenciated themselves from reptiles (cold/warm blood, scales/skin, milk/no-milk) in a logical fashion. There are no intermediate stages, none have been found. And to keep saying that one day we will find something is like Darwin pinning his hopes on paleontology to find his transitional forms, which it never did.

I think i went off topic..but u get the point.
 
Upvote 0

JohnR7

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2002
25,258
209
Ohio
✟29,532.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
mo.mentum said:
Humanity has existed for a long time without science, and relied on superstitious beliefs regarding the Universe and God. The first scientists, in the proper sense of the word, were the Muslims the 9th->14th century AD.

Science goes back at least 5000 years, esp. in the area of astronomy, agriculture & animal husbandry.
 
Upvote 0

platzapS

Expanding Mind
Nov 12, 2002
3,572
300
33
Sunshine State
Visit site
✟5,263.00
Faith
Humanist
What is YEC? And i want to make the flood unglobal. Then it would fit the pattern of other punishments God brought down on rebellious people. Why would Noah's people be honored with a global flodo and have all humanity wiped out because of their evil? Doesn't make sense if God is Infinitely Just and Merciful.

YEC stands for Young-Earth Creationist. They generally believe that God created the earth around 6000-10,000 years ago, and that macro-evolution as put foward by Darwin is incorrect. Most, but not all, YEC's think of the flood as global, putting down most of today's fossil and coal deposits, and creating some landforms like the Grand Canyon.
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
mo.mentum said:
Simple, it's called a "white man's burden". They saw themselves as civilizing the world. Origins only added justification to this reasoning.
White man's burden was not used as an excuse for the slavery instituted in the United States and treating them as if they were animals. And anyway, do you really think that they wanted to civilize the Africans, Indians, and Native Americans or do you think the Europeans might have possibly thought that God created them superior? A little possible?

Their excuses were not the same as their true feelings.

What is YEC? :)
Young earth creationist. The belief that God created all life and existance 6,000 years ago as is interpreted literally from Genesis.

And i want to make the flood unglobal. Then it would fit the pattern of other punishments God brought down on rebellious people. Why would Noah's people be honored with a global flodo and have all humanity wiped out because of their evil? Doesn't make sense if God is Infinitely Just and Merciful.
So are you an old earth creationist?

Here lies a misconception about God. Many poeple see Him as the Creator and that's it. He set the wheels in motion and let the whole thing run its own course.... Creation is an ongoing process. He is the Sustainer of the world not just the Creator.

I disagree. God does not hold atoms or molecules together. God is not involved in my cellular respiration or the earth's water cycle or the sun's nuclear fusion. So how exactly does God sustain the universe. And if God isn't involved in any of those processes, why should I throw away the evidence that supports biological evolution and believe that He specially creates all life on the planet?

perfect machine which is the human body?
Perfect machine? What about genetic diseases, the acid byproduct of anaerobic respiration, the back problems we develop due to being bipedal, our genes for a tail, and our tendancy to occasionally develop mental disorders? Those aren't perfect characteristics.

That 0.1% of BILLIONS of genes makes a big difference. We're not that much alike.
Try 66,000. So, even with 2% being the a difference in genes, we are only looking at 1,320 different genes, many of which are different only by a few base pairs. We are very much alike.

EMPIRICAL SCIENCE is what I'm talking about.
Throwing God into science whenever you find it convenient is not empirical science.
 
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

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,677
7,745
64
Massachusetts
✟339,453.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
mo.mentum said:
How long will scientist marvel and the perfect machine which is the human body? They say chimps and humans are the closest relatives, yet they are only 99.9% similar. That 0.1% of BILLIONS of genes makes a big difference. We're not that much alike.
There are about ten or twenty times as many differences between a human and a chimp as there are between two humans. As species go, that makes us very similar.

Nematode sperm doesn't need tails because it's released directly onto the females eggs. Human sperm needs to find it.
Nematode sperm have to move too, but they do so using a simpler system -- kind of like an amoeba. In general, the answer to your argument about sperm is that either components were already present in the cells from which sperm evolved, or were not needed when they first evolved. Thus protective fluid was not needed when sperm were released directly into the ocean. Does this make sense? Can you see how different parts could evolve at different times, and only become necessary after they'd appeared?

I just want to have someone plainly explain to me how mammals differenciated themselves from reptiles (cold/warm blood, scales/skin, milk/no-milk) in a logical fashion. There are no intermediate stages, none have been found. And to keep saying that one day we will find something is like Darwin pinning his hopes on paleontology to find his transitional forms, which it never did.
The characteristics you've listed are ones that aren't preserved in fossils, so how could anyone offer to show you intermediate stages? For characteristics that are preserved (i.e. bones), there is a very nice series of transitional fossils between the "mammal-like reptiles" and early mammals. Look it up.
 
Upvote 0

mo.mentum

[One God]
Aug 9, 2003
1,218
13
46
Montreal
✟16,445.00
Faith
Muslim
sfs said:
The characteristics you've listed are ones that aren't preserved in fossils, so how could anyone offer to show you intermediate stages? For characteristics that are preserved (i.e. bones), there is a very nice series of transitional fossils between the "mammal-like reptiles" and early mammals. Look it up.

I dunno! You tell me! You're the ones telling me that animals evolved from one another just by staring at their fossils.

How can plain bones tell you how the animal lived or how it really behaved/looked like. Yet our books are filled with drawings and such of this stuff.

Mammal-like reptiles? Oh you mean like the duck-billed platterpus? How did that come about? Maybe these mammal-like reptiles were just another highly specialized creature with unique feature.

What about the 4 winged fossil they found a few months back?

Come on! Answers please :)
 
Upvote 0

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
56
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟20,947.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
Mo.mentum - check this forum. It's a Christians Only forum. Aren't you a Muslim? Or are you here as an affirmation that you believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God from God, Light from light, True God from true God?

I don't imagine you are - indeed I imagine that the above formula is blasphemy, isn't it?
 
Upvote 0

troodon

Be wise and be smart
Dec 16, 2002
1,698
58
39
University of Iowa
Visit site
✟17,147.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
mo.mentum said:
I dunno! You tell me! You're the ones telling me that animals evolved from one another just by staring at their fossils.
Their scales/skin, warm/cold bloodedness, and existance of mammary glands are not fossilized. We can tell they evolved from each other by looking at their skeletal features. For example, we see how in mammal-like reptiles 2 reptilian jaw bones became the 2 bones in the mammalian inner ear.

How can plain bones tell you how the animal lived or how it really behaved/looked like.
They can tell us a lot about behavior. What they ate, what ate them, how they died (occasionally). Fossil footprints can tell us whether they herded or not.

Yet our books are filled with drawings and such of this stuff.
I don't know about yours, but both my biology books only had very outdated pictures of fully scaled, cold-blooded looking dinosaurs; I don't think you would argue with that.

Mammal-like reptiles? Oh you mean like the duck-billed platterpus?
No, not like the "duck-billed platterpus". We are talking about therapsids as mentioned here.

How did that come about?
It's a very basal mammal that has had ancestors that were lucky enough to find a niche they could stay in.

Maybe these mammal-like reptiles were just another highly specialized creature with unique feature.
Therapsids are an enormous taxonomic group that include whole varieties of animals. They are not just one little species in the back woods of Australia.

What about the 4 winged fossil they found a few months back?
Microraptor was a very feathered dinosaur. Feathers, unlike scales and skin, do fossilize well under the right conditions. We are very lucky that those conditions existed in the Yixian during the early Cretaceous :)
 
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

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟32,309.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
mo.mentum said:
Not true. The basis of Nazism and Facism is evolution. Read up on it.

I did. And the basis of Nazism was Christianity and creationism. All the following quotes are from Mein Kampf. Read them.

"Human culture and civilization on this continent are inseparably bound up with the presence of the Aryan. If he dies out or declines, the dark veils of an age without culture will again descend on this globe. The undermining of the existence of human culture by the destruction of its bearer seems in the eyes of a folkish philosophy the most execrable crime. Anyone who dares to lay hands on the highest image of the Lord commits sacrilege against the benevolent Creator of this miracle and contributes to the expulsion from paradise." " It is a sin against the will of the Eternal Creator if His most gifted beings by the hundreds and hundreds of thousands are allowed to degenerate in the present proletarian morass, while Hottentots and Zulu Kaffirs are trained for intellectual professions." "What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproductionof our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purityof our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that ourpeople may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the Creator of the universe." The result of all racial crossing is therefore in brief always the following: To bring about such a development is, then, nothing else but to sin against the will of the Eternal Creator."
"The folkish-minded man, in particular," Hitler concludes, "has the sacred duty, each in his own denomination, of making people stop just talking superficially of God's will, and actually fulfill God's will, and not let God's word be desecrated. For God's will gave men their form, their essence and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will."

(all quotes from Hitler, Mein Kampf, online version)

http://205.180.85.40/w/pc.cgi?mid=12555&sid=7271

The theory itself is neutral, but a belief in it leads people to think of themselves as superior, or that their race is meant to dominate all others.

You do realize that racism began in creationism, don't you?

RACISM is the problem, not evolution. Racism will take any other idea -- creationism or evolution -- and warp it to their own ends.

When Darwin first came out with evolution by natural selection, it initially destroyed racism, because racism was built on the idea that each race was a separate creation. See Gobineau below. Evolution had all races coming from a single source -- common ancestor -- and therefore none could be superior. Some Germans took evolution and warped it with the idea of "more evolved" and then decided that some races were "more evolved" than others. A concept that is antithetical to Darwin's idea. All this is detailed in the book The Evolution of Racism.

"The foundation of modern "scientific" racism was Gobineau's (1853-5) Essay on the Inequality of Human Races. Arthur de Gobineau (1816-1882) was a one-time diplomat who held that humanity is divided into three races, white, yellow and black. He considered that his reasoning established that the black race had an "animal character, that appears in the shape of the pelvis"; has a crude yet powerful energy; and dull mental faculties but has an "intensity of desire". The yellow race has little physical energy; feeble desires; mediocrity; a respect for order; and "does not dream or theorise". The whites have an energetic intelligence, perseverance, instinct for order, love of liberty, and sense of honour; they can be cruel, but when they are "they are conscious of their cruelty; it is very, doubtful whether such a consciousness exists in the negro".
"Gobineau was, naturally enough for Europeans of his day, a Biblical literalist; and he remained so all his life, seeing in Darwinism a negation of his view that races always had been and always would be as they now are"
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/cg_science_of_racism.htm
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.