• 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.

Brain Disappoints Evolutionary Thoughts

ikester7579

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2003
1,452
23
Florida
✟1,800.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Psalm 119:130
"The entrance of Your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple."

According to evolutionary thought, humans came from ape-like creatures. These ape-like creatures came from reptiles through many steps. Likewise reptiles ultimately came from fish, through many steps. Evolutionists say that with each major stage, more parts were added to the brain. The final development, and the greatest of all, is the cerebral cortex.

According to this theory, one of the oldest parts of the brain is the part deep inside. Evolutionists claim that this part of the brain, called the basal ganglia, comes from our reptilian past. They have described this part of the brain as "primitive." It controls such simple things as movement and spatial memory. These are basic functions needed by reptiles. Of course, the evolutionary view that the basal ganglia is primitive was never scientifically researched.

Then researchers started to examine the workings of the basal ganglia. They have concluded that the deep structures of the brain that are supposed to be primitive are actually quite sophisticated. In fact, these so-called reptilian structures rival the cerebral cortex in sophistication. These structures receive input from all parts of the cortex. And all the neurochemicals found anywhere else in the body are also found in these structures. In other words, there is absolutely no evidence of their being primitive.

Once again scientific research has not found what evolutionists expected. The human brain has not developed by adding parts to reptile brains. It was specially created just for human beings.

 

REF.: Miller, Julie Ann. 1985. Deep core of brain gains respect. Science News, v. 128, Nov. 9. p. 297.
 

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
43
Visit site
✟43,817.00
Faith
Taoist
1985?
Do you have any more up to date info on this, a lot has changed since 1985.

Originally posted by ikester7579
Psalm 119:130
"The entrance of Your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple."

According to evolutionary thought, humans came from ape-like creatures. These ape-like creatures came from reptiles through many steps. Likewise reptiles ultimately came from fish, through many steps. Evolutionists say that with each major stage, more parts were added to the brain. The final development, and the greatest of all, is the cerebral cortex.

According to this theory, one of the oldest parts of the brain is the part deep inside. Evolutionists claim that this part of the brain, called the basal ganglia, comes from our reptilian past. They have described this part of the brain as "primitive." It controls such simple things as movement and spatial memory. These are basic functions needed by reptiles. Of course, the evolutionary view that the basal ganglia is primitive was never scientifically researched.

Then researchers started to examine the workings of the basal ganglia. They have concluded that the deep structures of the brain that are supposed to be primitive are actually quite sophisticated. In fact, these so-called reptilian structures rival the cerebral cortex in sophistication. These structures receive input from all parts of the cortex. And all the neurochemicals found anywhere else in the body are also found in these structures. In other words, there is absolutely no evidence of their being primitive.

Once again scientific research has not found what evolutionists expected. The human brain has not developed by adding parts to reptile brains. It was specially created just for human beings.

 

REF.: Miller, Julie Ann. 1985. Deep core of brain gains respect. Science News, v. 128, Nov. 9. p. 297.
 
Upvote 0

chickenman

evil unamerican
May 8, 2002
1,376
7
44
Visit site
✟32,374.00
what a stupid post, the basal ganglia is a more "primitive" part of the human brain in the sense that it came first in evolutionary history, not in terms of how complex it is.

I think you have the sense of the word primitive incorrect. It would be expected that the basal ganglia would evolve just like the other parts of the brain.
 
Upvote 0

lucaspa

Legend
Oct 22, 2002
14,569
416
New York
✟47,309.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Originally posted by ikester7579
According to this theory, one of the oldest parts of the brain is the part deep inside. Evolutionists claim that this part of the brain, called the basal ganglia, comes from our reptilian past. They have described this part of the brain as "primitive." It controls such simple things as movement and spatial memory. These are basic functions needed by reptiles. Of course, the evolutionary view that the basal ganglia is primitive was never scientifically researched.

Then researchers started to examine the workings of the basal ganglia. They have concluded that the deep structures of the brain that are supposed to be primitive are actually quite sophisticated. In fact, these so-called reptilian structures rival the cerebral cortex in sophistication. These structures receive input from all parts of the cortex. And all the neurochemicals found anywhere else in the body are also found in these structures. In other words, there is absolutely no evidence of their being primitive.

Cickenman and  Seebs are correct: evolutionists use the word "primitive" in a different context.  To you, "primitive" means "simple".  In evolution, "primitive" simply means "there first" or "widely used" or "unspecialized".  Structures that pertain to particular lifestyles evolved from the primitive structures are "derived".

Now, there is no reason that the basal ganglia can't also have evolved since the split from reptiles.  There is no requirement that it stays exactly the same as reptile basal ganglia. 

Also, I would dispute that "movement" and "spatial memory" are simple.  The calculations of space and movement that a frog uses to calculate where to flick its tongue to catch a fly is as sophisticated as these things get.  Even insects have neural circuits that perform incredibly sophisiticated calculations in space and time. 

Once again, we see a strawman of evolution that creationists destroy.  Make a strawman and knock it down.  A lot easier than tackling the real thing.

There is a recent book (1998) entitled The Evolution of Intelligence that will introduce you to the real thing if you dare.
 
Upvote 0

Hector Medina

Questioning Roman Catholic
May 10, 2002
845
6
44
San Antonio,Texas USA
Visit site
✟31,223.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
ikester7579,

Your on the right track,DUDE.

Also,according to a good creationist(s) if evolution were true we could only eat each other because of the similar genetic makeups(or something,its been a while since I've seen it).

In fact they oversimiplfy everything we are too complicated to have evolved.

God Bless creationism :)

Hector
 
Upvote 0

lithium.

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2002
4,662
4
nowhere
✟37,536.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Originally posted by Hector Medina
ikester7579,

Your on the right track,DUDE.

Also,according to a good creationist(s) if evolution were true we could only eat each other because of the similar genetic makeups(or something,its been a while since I've seen it).

In fact they oversimiplfy everything we are too complicated to have evolved.

God Bless creationism :)

Hector

Well hello Hector, I think you mean God Bless Evolution, right? HEHE

So we are too complicated to have evolved well if that makes you goto sleep better than by all means believe that.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
43
Visit site
✟43,817.00
Faith
Taoist
LOL, I would really like to see the evidence that says if we evolved, we could only eat each other. :)

Makes me thing of: "If we are really what we eat, then the only real humans are cannibals."

:)

Originally posted by Hector Medina
ikester7579,

Your on the right track,DUDE.

Also,according to a good creationist(s) if evolution were true we could only eat each other because of the similar genetic makeups(or something,its been a while since I've seen it).

In fact they oversimiplfy everything we are too complicated to have evolved.

God Bless creationism :)

Hector
 
Upvote 0

Smilin

Spirit of the Wolf
Jun 18, 2002
5,650
244
60
Appalachia, The Trail of Tears
Visit site
✟38,406.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Originally posted by LadyShea
Dolphins have cerebral cortices, and additional functions we don't (sonar). Basically, their brain is as highly (or MORE) evolved as ours. Did God just really, really like Dolphins?

yes my friend.. Dolphins are really liked! :)
 
Upvote 0

euphoric

He hates these cans!!
Jun 22, 2002
480
5
50
Visit site
✟30,771.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Originally posted by Hector Medina
ikester7579,

Your on the right track,DUDE.

Oh, how would you know?

Originally posted by Hector Medina
Also,according to a good creationist(s) if evolution were true we could only eat each other because of the similar genetic makeups(or something,its been a while since I've seen it).

WHAT?!  I want a reference for this.  If someone actually put this forward for public consumption, I would love to see it so that we could all rightly ridicule that person.

Originally posted by Hector Medina
In fact they oversimiplfy everything we are too complicated to have evolved.

Scientists put out reams of data every year.  Evolution deniers publish web sites and books geared toward a scientifically untrained public.  Who's oversimplifying things there?

Originally posted by Hector Medina
God Bless creationism :) 

Next time you speak to Him, ask Him to bless it with a brain.

-brett
 
Upvote 0

ikester7579

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2003
1,452
23
Florida
✟1,800.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Originally posted by lucaspa
Cickenman and  Seebs are correct: evolutionists use the word "primitive" in a different context.  To you, "primitive" means "simple".  In evolution, "primitive" simply means "there first" or "widely used" or "unspecialized".  Structures that pertain to particular lifestyles evolved from the primitive structures are "derived".

Now, there is no reason that the basal ganglia can't also have evolved since the split from reptiles.  There is no requirement that it stays exactly the same as reptile basal ganglia. 

Also, I would dispute that "movement" and "spatial memory" are simple.  The calculations of space and movement that a frog uses to calculate where to flick its tongue to catch a fly is as sophisticated as these things get.  Even insects have neural circuits that perform incredibly sophisiticated calculations in space and time. 

Once again, we see a strawman of evolution that creationists destroy.  Make a strawman and knock it down.  A lot easier than tackling the real thing.

There is a recent book (1998) entitled The Evolution of Intelligence that will introduce you to the real thing if you dare.

Hmmm. Lets see, if the meaning of a word does not suite the arguement so change it's meaning? That's a good one.

Primitive: Ancient, Antiquated, crude, early, old, primary, primevil, primordial, pristine, raw, rough, simple, undeveloped, etc...

So you see it can mean both. But sense it was used in terms of being basic and being compared to a reptiles brain, it was not being put forth as old or first part of the brain. If I say a part of my brain has the same function as early reptiles it could mean either or. So maybe the person who came up with the idea should have been more clear in their meaning. Besides, what was quoted came from a science journal, not a christain journal. So if anyone was confused it was the person who wrote it.

 

About the recent book. The views of science are constantly changing, because to stay ahead of a lie you have to keep changing the lie so everyone stays confused. No one can figure it out because by the time they do it's changed again. So when someone says what was said in the past, you can answer it the way you did and say it's out dated. Yep that's what's is usually said about the Bible. Funny how you use the same excuse in science. Maybe the scientist from that era were to primitve. And if that's the case, what about Darwin? Was he to primitive to? My guess would be yes. Why? Because science is now pushing a new theory. We came from Mars. O well, gotta keep em confused. What's next? We were tranported through a worm hole from another galaxy. When it's star exploded. Or aliens planted us here to grow like weeds. I'll stick with My God. He 's stays the same and is not into confusing his people by changing the meaning of his word or words to suit his purpose.

One very good example of science changing things to suit their views is the Carbon Dating Machine. The person who invented it said that it would not be accurate past 10,000 years. But now sense science wants to say the earth is billions of years old they say he's out dated. Well maybe his machine is too.

 
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
43
Visit site
✟43,817.00
Faith
Taoist
Well, the same argument could be used against the bible. Since it was originaly written in a different language, and there are multiple translations, you could say that they have changed the words to fit what they want.

"The views of science are constantly changing, because to stay ahead of a lie you have to keep changing the lie so everyone stays confused."

While your making wild accusations, would it be too much trouble to ask for proof of this statement?

Originally posted by ikester7579
Hmmm. Lets see, if the meaning of a word does not suite the arguement so change it's meaning? That's a good one.

Primitive: Ancient, Antiquated, crude, early, old, primary, primevil, primordial, pristine, raw, rough, simple, undeveloped, etc...

So you see it can mean both. But sense it was used in terms of being basic and being compared to a reptiles brain, it was not being put forth as old or first part of the brain. If I say a part of my brain has the same function as early reptiles it could mean either or. So maybe the person who came up with the idea should have been more clear in their meaning. Besides, what was quoted came from a science journal, not a christain journal. So if anyone was confused it was the person who wrote it.

 

About the recent book. The views of science are constantly changing, because to stay ahead of a lie you have to keep changing the lie so everyone stays confused. No one can figure it out because by the time they do it's changed again. So when someone says what was said in the past, you can answer it the way you did and say it's out dated. Yep that's what's is usually said about the Bible. Funny how you use the same excuse in science. Maybe the scientist from that era were to primitve. And if that's the case, what about Darwin? Was he to primitive to? My guess would be yes. Why? Because science is now pushing a new theory. We came from Mars. O well, gotta keep em confused. What's next? We were tranported through a worm hole from another galaxy. When it's star exploded. Or aliens planted us here to grow like weeds. I'll stick with My God. He 's stays the same and is not into confusing his people by changing the meaning of his word or words to suit his purpose.

 
 
Upvote 0

ikester7579

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2003
1,452
23
Florida
✟1,800.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Originally posted by LadyShea
Dolphins have cerebral cortices, and additional functions we don't (sonar). Basically, their brain is as highly (or MORE) evolved as ours. Did God just really, really like Dolphins?

What would we use sonar for? It only works in water and where do we live? God gives each animal what he or she needs. Some needs are different so the animal is different. This also helps keep balance in Nature and between all created things.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
43
Visit site
✟43,817.00
Faith
Taoist
Lol, and there ends the short lived attempt at actual debate about real information. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by ikester7579
Quote: While your making wild accusations, would it be too much trouble to ask for proof of this statement?

Why? You would just say: It's outdated or primitive lol.
:rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0

ikester7579

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2003
1,452
23
Florida
✟1,800.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Do you know the history of how Evolution got into our schools? And did you know that the evidence used was later proved false? I'm not gonna tell you what it was so I can see how much you really know on this and the lie that started it. By now that history has probably been changed to cover it up. So it will be interesting to see what yall come up with.
 
Upvote 0

lithium.

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2002
4,662
4
nowhere
✟37,536.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Do you know the history of how Evolution got into our schools? And did you know that the evidence used was later proved false?

Well let's see The Theory of Evolution is part of science so duh they will start teaching it. And back up your claims that the evidence was proven false.

Just because you disagree with the facts/evidence doesn't mean they cease to exist.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
43
Visit site
✟43,817.00
Faith
Taoist
I would say that I dont know, Since Im here to learn, why dont you tell me.

A good tip is to always back up your claims.

Originally posted by ikester7579
Do you know the history of how Evolution got into our schools? And did you know that the evidence used was later proved false? I'm not gonna tell you what it was so I can see how much you really know on this and the lie that started it. By now that history has probably been changed to cover it up. So it will be interesting to see what yall come up with.
 
Upvote 0