Answering questions on Evolution

[Split Rock]

I have lots of questions. But if the answer to my first one is "yes" then it is pointless to ask anymore.
Question number 1:
Are the answers given to any question I might ask about evolution going to be answered be fallible man?

fallible
1. capable of being mistaken; erring
2. liable to mislead

I would say yes to 1.

Exactly my point. Now apply this to the Bible.

Glad to hear one of you admit this! Yes, the people who wrote and who now interpret the Bible are capable of being mistaken; erring.

So...

You're suggesting that the Bible is a reported by fallible men and therefore unreliable?

Let's say it is not inerrant, rather than "unreliable."

 

[MoonLancer]

that's pretty nuts. The cake is made by fallible bakers, and thus it is a lie.

 

[hangback]

I have lots of questions. But if the answer to my first one is "yes" then it is pointless to ask anymore.
Question number 1:
Are the answers given to any question I might ask about evolution going to be answered be fallible man?

fallible
1. capable of being mistaken; erring
2. liable to mislead

Who wrote the bible? fallible men.
Who introduced you to the bible? fallible man.
What is your pastor? a fallible man, and as Bushido216 wrote, everything around you that keeps you alive were made, grown or built by fallible man, so grow up and stop trying to be smart because you're making yourself look foolish.

 

[metherion]

Well, I'm not a creationist, but I do have a question. A fairly random one too.

Do you know when the XY and ZW systems of sex determination 'split' as it were? I recently learned about the second type and now I'm curious. And if you know, I WANT TO PICK YOUR BRAINS.

Metherion

 

[BananaSlug]

Can you name --- by name --- three persons alive today who are not mutants?

No. We are all different from our parents. Any other questions?

 

[BananaSlug]

I have lots of questions. But if the answer to my first one is "yes" then it is pointless to ask anymore.

Why do you say that?

Question number 1:
Are the answers given to any question I might ask about evolution going to be answered be fallible man?

Science may be done by by fallible men, however science has the ability to correct itself when it is wrong. By continual observation, experimentation, and peer-review, science is continually self correcting. When hypotheses are shown to be wrong, they are thrown out and a new hypothesis is made until we find the correct answer. Scientists that attempt to falsify data are quickly found out.

fallible
1. capable of being mistaken; erring
2. liable to mislead

Every human is capable of being mistaken. The question is, is that human capable of admitting their mistake?

 

[hangback]

Every human is capable of being mistaken. The question is, is that human capable of admitting their mistake?

So if creationists are human they are also capable of getting it wrong.

 

[BananaSlug]

We should have more creationists in this forum. I honestly thought I would have more questions.

 

[Loudmouth]

I have lots of questions. But if the answer to my first one is "yes" then it is pointless to ask anymore.
Question number 1:
Are the answers given to any question I might ask about evolution going to be answered be fallible man?

Since you are fallible it is pointless to answer the question since it is possible that you will misinterpret the answer.

Being a fallible person, how do you even brush your teeth in the morning?

 

[Mike Elphick]

Do you know when the XY and ZW systems of sex determination 'split' as it were? I recently learned about the second type and now I'm curious.

You don't actually need separate chromosomes for sex determination. All that is required, in principle, is the activation and suppression of genes that control gender. So it's no surprise there are several sex-determining systems that have evolved. In some species, even environmental factors can trigger gene expression leading to male and female differentiation.

There's plenty of places to look this up on the internet. I've copied some bits by way of introduction:-

A sex-determination system is a biological system that determines the development of sexual characteristics in an organism. Most sexual organisms have two sexes. In many cases, sex determination is genetic: males and females have different alleles or even different genes that specify their sexual morphology. In animals, this is often accompanied by chromosomal differences. In other cases, sex is determined by environmental variables (such as temperature) or social variables (the size of an organism relative to other members of its population). The details of some sex-determination systems are not yet fully understood.
Wapedia - Wiki: Sex-determination system

The ZW sex-determination system is a system that determines the sex of offspring in birds, some fish, and some insects (including butterflies and moths), and some reptiles, including Komodo dragons. In the ZW system it is the ovum that determines the sex of the offspring, in contrast to the XY sex-determination system and the X0 sex-determination system, where it is the sperm which determines the sex. The letters Z and W are used to distinguish this system from the XY system. Males are the homogametic sex (ZZ), while females are heterogametic (ZW). The Z chromosome is larger and has more genes, like the X chromosome in the XY system.

<...>

No genes are shared between the avian ZW and mammal XY chromosomes, and from a comparison between chicken and human, the Z chromosome appeared similar to the autosomal chromosome 9 in human, rather than X or Y, leading researchers to believe the ZW and XY sex determination systems do not share an origin, but that the sex chromosomes are derived from autosomal chromosomes of the common ancestor. A paper from 2004 compared the chicken Z chromosome with platypus X chromosomes and suggested that the two systems are related. The platypus has a ten-chromosome–based system, where the chromosomes form a multivalent chain in male meiosis, segregating into XXXXX-sperm and YYYYY-sperm, with XY-equivalent chromosomes at one end of this chain and the ZW-equivalent chromosomes at the other end according to the paper.
ZW sex-determination system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Loudmouth]

No, you don't know that.You're making yourself look bad, Loudmouth, not me.

I'm pretty confident in my assessment. You pretty much gave it away when you said:

"I find it interesting that those who embrace evolution, and think they're qualified to take on a literal creationist, would make this rookie mistake."

So obviously this has to do with a theological definition of person. This harkens back to one of the earliest debates in christian theology, the personhood of God (three persons in one being).

You are trying to be too cute by half.

 

[metherion]

@ Mike Elphick-

I found out HOW they work on wiki and stuff before I asked here, I was wondering if anyone knew when/where in the tree of life they evolved. After all, insects, SOME reptiles, birds, and SOME fish use it,that means not all reptiles use it and not all fish use it, which puzzled me as to the timing of it coming about. If that makes sense.

(And yes, I realize DNA can't really fossilize so we don't have fossils of ZW coming about, but as to WHICH fish and reptiles got it and whatnot would be neat to know)

Thanks tho

Metherion

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Then give us an example of a person who is not human.

Thor, Zeus and Superman.

 

[sk8Joyful]

What do you mean by mutant?
Someone who has DNA changes not found in either parent?

Yes, we all mutate/adapt/evolve
as each of us was created to fortunately change genes continuously... hopefully to PRAISE God.
That said,
No ameoba has evolved into a dinosaur.
No earthworm has evolved into an eagle.
No ape has evolved into a human, either.

But yes, GOD's creations were designed to *proliferate with increasing species-specific diversity*, to PRAISE God!
.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thor, Zeus and Superman.

Ya --- LOL --- and you're a YEC-educated man?

 

[Split Rock]

that's pretty nuts. The cake is made by fallible bakers, and thus it is a lie.

I think you are going too far with this statement. All cakes are baked by fallible people. Are they all Lies?? Most are fine... some are not made very well. It means that potentially, the cake may be made wrong. Personally, I have serious doubts that the writers of Genesis has any intention of telling a literal history. This is the first mistake creationists make. Or as AVET would say, "Rookie mistake." Therefore, one has to ask, (in this context) what mistakes did the writers actually make? On the other hand, the worst mistakes (in my opinion) are the ones made by those who interpret it out of its proper context.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Ya --- LOL --- and you're a YEC-educated man?

Regrettably, yes.

 

[TheOutsider]

Yes, we all mutate/adapt/evolve
as each of us was created to fortunately change genes continuously... hopefully to PRAISE God.
That said,
No ameoba has evolved into a dinosaur.
No earthworm has evolved into an eagle.
No ape has evolved into a human, either.

But yes, GOD's creations were designed to *proliferate with increasing species-specific diversity*, to PRAISE God!
.

I'm sorry, that wasn't a question.

 

[sk8Joyful]

This thread is for honest questions about the Theory of Evolution.

So creationists, this is your chance to ask a serious question.
As long as you will attempt to learn from what I tell you, I will answer honestly.

ok, my serious question is: How many 'missing-links',
starting with the book "Billions of missing-links" by Dr. Simmons M.D., are you able to explain?

 

[USincognito]

Yes, we all mutate/adapt/evolve
as each of us was created to fortunately change genes continuously... hopefully to PRAISE God.

What?

That said,
No ameoba has evolved into a dinosaur.
No earthworm has evolved into an eagle.
No ape has evolved into a human, either.

Almost. Amoebas did not evolve into dinosaurs, but amoebas and dinosaurs did share a single celled common ancestor billions of years ago. Earthworms did not evolve into eagles, but earthworms and eagles shared a common worm like ancestor billions of years ago. Humans did not evolve from apes since we are apes. We share a common ancestor with our fellow apes 6-7 million years ago.

But yes, GOD's creations were designed to *proliferate with increasing species-specific diversity*, to PRAISE God!

Sort of. Evolution is a one way street. Species don't stop being what it's ancestors were. Going into the past we see that some common ancestral species gave rise to new phylum, orders and genera, but from here on out populations will only form new subspecies and sub-subspecies etc.

ok, my serious question is: How many 'missing-links',
starting with the book "Billions of missing-links" by Dr. Simmons M.D., are you able to explain?

Missing link is a outdated notion for two reasons. First, we have found many transitional fossils that exhibit the characteristics of two taxons higher than species. We also have living examples like the monotremes that have both mammal and reptilian characteristics. Second, because of the genetic data we don't even need a single fossil. We can determine phylogenetic relationships solely by analyzing the DNA of living beings.

And sorry, but I really don't care what a medial doctor has to say about the fossil record. I'd rather trust a paleontologist.