Challenging Evolution

[razzelflabben]

Oh really? Darlie Rutiere is on death row in Texas for killing her children. She was the only person who was witness to the crime. She was convicted and sentanced to death via forensics.

Conversely, and I forget the details, but a few years back in Houston IIRC, a man who had been jailed for many years was released after his eyewitness recanted her testimony.

It's been pointed out again and again and I'm sure it will have to be pointed out many more times that we have more than just a body (fossils), we have DNA (blood), phylogenies (motive), etc. etc. if we're going to analogize evolution to forensics. If we were in a court of law, it would be a slam dunk case.

Now DNA testing can be done on blood, so I think that the fossil record is the blood, thus ruling out DNA. phylogenies, let's talk, what do you want to claim here as proof that is unique to the TOE?

 

[lucaspa]

Now on to the subject of one living cell organisms, First, this is different from what we were taught,

Who's we, paleface? You may have been told that the common ancestor was a one-celled organism, but I can't see you being told it was a "one living cell organism". That makes no sense.

secondly, you state that we cannot state taht all life rose form a single living cell. Yet we have overwhelming evidence to say that they did?

We have overwhelming evidence for
1. Common ancestry.
2. The common ancestor was a one-celled organism.

However, you can't combine those to say that there was only one one-celled organism. Do you see how the combination doesn't follow?

We have more problems with the theory when we try to figure out how these single cell organisms not only evolved into creatures, but how did they evolve into male and female?

That's not a problem. I'm afraid it is Argument from Ignorance. You have to remember that there is a differnce between what you know and what is known. The evolution of sex can be understood by looking at living organisms that are intermediates in the process.
1. C Zimmer, The slime alternative. Discover 19: 86-93, 1998 (Sept) Amoeba Dictyostelium is single celled, but forms multicelled organism with differentiation when food supplies are low. Sexually reproduces sometimes, forms a cyst, and then asexually divides with the new genetic material. Also forms an eye of sorts from individual cells that act as lenses. Cells act and use same proteins as phagocytes in immune system.
2. DL Kirk Molecular-Genetic Origins of Multicellularity and Cellular Differentiation. Reviewed by G Bell in Development: Volvox. Science 282: 248, Oct. 9, 1998. Volvox (an algae) is a model system of multicellularity. Has fewer than 20 cells and only two types: soma and germ cells. Has single celled relatives, notably Chlamydomonas.
3. Evolution of Sex. Science 281: 1979-2010, Sept. 25, 1998. A series of 8 review articles discussing the topic.
3a. http://www.nature.com/nrg/focus/evolsex/

Also do a search on "Volvox" on the web. Fascinating creatures. Have only two types of cells -- body cells and sex cells. No male and female but reproduce sexually.

What predictions can the TOE offer?

1. That all life can be classed in a nested hierarchy.
2. That not all species will be found in all layers of the fossil record.
3. That DNA sequences will not be independent observations but will be interrelated thru historical connections.
4. The characteristics of a hive mammal. Predicted before the naked mole rat was discovered.
5. That, as we go back in time, lineages will become less and less distinct.
6. "For example, scorpionflies (Mecoptera) and true flies (Diptera) have enough similarities that entomologists consider them to be closely related. Scorpionflies have four wings of about the same size, and true flies have a large front pair of wings but the back pair is replaced by small club-shaped structures. If Diptera evolved from Mecoptera, as comparative anatomy suggests, scientists predicted that a fossil fly with four wings might be found—and in 1976 this is exactly what was discovered."
7. That you can treat AIDS by giving anti-viral drugs for a period of time, then remove them for a period, and then institute them again. And this is a successful way to keep HIV under control.
8. That guppies placed above falls so that predators can't get to them will evolve so that they are larger and mate later. 2. Reznick, DN, Shaw, FH, Rodd, FH, and Shaw, RG. Evaluationof the rate of evolution in natural populations of guppies (Poeciliareticulata). Science 275:1934-1937, 1997. The lay article isPredatory-free guppies take an evolutionary leap forward, pg 1880.

 

[Jet Black]

Now DNA testing can be done on blood, so I think that the fossil record is the blood, thus ruling out DNA. phylogenies, let's talk, what do you want to claim here as proof that is unique to the TOE?

I mentioned a few of these. organisation of ERVs and ALUs only really make sense in the light of TOE.

 

[lucaspa]

okay,seeing as nobody is really making any progress...........at all.I have a question for all of you,Creationist and Evolutionist alike:

Is what you Beleive True all the Time?

Is it true in all times?

Is it always firm in its beleif and never changing?

You are going to have to define "Evolutionist" for us. What does that word mean for you?

I don't "believe" evolution any more than I "believe" Cell Theory. Scientific theories are accepted or refuted based on the data. The data I see shows creationism to be a wrong theory and evolution to be supported. But that has nothing to do with my "beliefs".

But we went through the relegions,buddhism,islam,judiasm,Evolution,reincarnation,satanic ones.and of course Christianity.

Ah, here's the problem. Evolution is not a religion. It's a scientific theory.

And Christianity does change! Remember the Reformation! Remember the arguments over Trinity. At one time Trinity was not accepted and then it was. Going to the Bible, look at Acts 7. Guess what? The dietary rules changed.

Evolution is just a silly idea.

Then why did God put so much evidence in His Creation showing He created by evolution? You have more chutzpah than I have, calling God "silly".

 

[lucaspa]

Nothing at all was said about convincing, the comment was made about whether or not the evidence was conclusive.

My apologies. You did say "conclusive". So, let me rephrase the question: What would you consider to be conclusive evidence?

lucaspa: There is another meaning: the evidence is conclusive but you, for emotional reasons, can't accept evolution.
RAzzel: Yeah, I am an emotional person, Merle who started this thread, based on another thread, got all over me because of the lack of emotion in my arguements. Humm, we can't even agree on that bit of evidence, but we are suppose to agree on anything that has to do with the TOE?!?

But you being emotional isn't what I proposed, was it? I proposed you could not find the data for evolution conclusive, because, if you did, it would cause you emotional distress.

What I lean toward, is about faith, I freely admit that, but that faith is not challenged by the TOE or any truth that it might hold.

But you admit that TOC is founded on Genesis 1 and other passages of the Bible. What happens to Genesis 1 and the Bible, in your opinion, if evolution is true and TOC is false?

Even the name -- Theory of Creation -- seems significant. It looks to me that if the Theory of Creation is wrong, then Creation didn't happen. Is that how it is for you? Would Creation by God still happen? If so, how? If TOC is wrong, how would God have created?

MY life and passions in life however are challenged by the belief that what is not proven is fact. I thrive on seeking truth.

Well, guess what? You share that passion with all those who showed TOC to be wrong and evolution to be correct! Remember, TOC was the accepted scientific theory between 1700 -1831. But scientists abandoned TOC. These scientists were all Christian and most were ministers. They must have had a reason to decide TOC was wrong. Remember, Darwin started out thinking TOC was correct. What does your research tell you that was?

What we have here is not a belief system of which theory is truth, but rather a belief system that we have a long way to go before we can know the truth about our origins.

And why do you have that belief system that we have a long way to go before we can know the truth about our origins? You haven't read Origin of the Species. I don't think you have read any textbook on evolutionary biology. So how do you know what we already know?

Go to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi and enter "evolution" as your search term. Look at the sheer number of papers that have been done on the subject since 1965 in a medical database. Over 160,000. Don't you think those investigations would have told us something about our origins?

 

[JesusPosse]

THe Beleifs!THe facts!You never hear anybody debating whether the sky is blue,or the sun is bright.Those things never change(well,the sky is and exception)Just like the bible,yes some interpretations change,yes the dietary rules change but the hard truth,the base of the bible does not change.

The Bible is true in All times.It has proven its prophecies over and again in the Bible.What it prophesizes in Revelation,some of it is already happening.

It is tru All the Time.Sin is Sin.We are all sinners.Jesus is the only way to Heaven.He is coming back for us.Satan and all those who don't repent will go to Hell.Those things are tru all the time.

Some things in the Bible changed over time.We no longer refrain from eating pork,we don't sacrifice,we don't need priests to pray to God fo us,there is no Temple(Besides Churches).Yet the Beleifs in the Bible never changed.The prophecy of a seed from the womb of Eve that would Crush the Searpents head never change.The Fact that Jesus is the only way to God never changeed.Yes some material things in the bible Changed,but nothing concerning God and The Biblical beleifs changed.

 

[Jet Black]

Futuyma's "Evolutionary Biology" alone has about 1600 references in it (41 pages with ~40 refs per page, and that is on the low side I think, it is probably more like 45 per page)

 

[JesusPosse]

Yes! That is it!It is a theory,a unproven human scientific Theory!No matter what you guys bring into this forum,pictures of skulls,Dna Tests,all that,it does not matter.You have no hard proof that anything Evolution suggests is true.It has never been proven no matter how much Tests they do.No matter how many skeletons they examine,they are doing nothing but guessing,trying to explain away all the religions of the world they are too scared to face.

 

[Jet Black]

whisky tango foxtrot? lwt me paraphrase what you just said no matter how much hard evidence you have, you have no hard evidence"

Evolution doesn't explain away religions, it says how things happen. religion can still be involved.

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

And how do YOU explain ERVs?

 

[JesusPosse]

Which religions?When it comes down to it,Evolution can only be latched onto a few religions without contradicting itself.Whichreligions are right and which ones are wrong?

 

[Jet Black]

well whihever religions don't conflict with the facts and cause themselves theological problems. so I suppose that counts the Norse religions out and my idea of heaven is so close to valhalla.

 

[JesusPosse]

So basically what your saying is,whatever religion contradicts evolution is wrong,right?

 

[Jet Black]

So basically what your saying is,whatever religion contradicts evolution is wrong,right?

no, I am saying whatever religion conflicts with the facts and causes itself theological problems is wrong. Last tuesdayism is perfectly viable, since it doesn't matter that iggy the elf is a liar or not. however if iggy claimed to not be a liar, then last tuesdayism would have a problem.

 

[JesusPosse]

I pray for all of you,coming in here and trying to explain away what the Bible says.Whether or not you beleive in Creation no longer bothers me.I will have sent a letter to one of the Aministraters that me get me kicked off of here.But I cannot standby and let this stuff go on in a website devoted to God.This may be the last time we speak,so I am praying for all of you,that you find your way back to the light.

-Jesusposse-

 

[Ishmael Borg]

So basically what your saying is,whatever religion contradicts evolution is wrong,right?

If the interpretations of sacred texts of various religions prompt descriptions of natural processes that have been proven false, either the interpretations or the texts are in error. This has minimal, if any, impact on the validity of a religion, or its deity/deities.

So, no, no one is saying what you posted.

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

I will have sent a letter to one of the Aministraters that me get me kicked off of here.But I cannot standby and let this stuff go on in a website devoted to God.

Talk about Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

 

[Ishmael Borg]

I pray for all of you,coming in here and trying to explain away what the Bible says.Whether or not you beleive in Creation no longer bothers me.I will have sent a letter to one of the Aministraters that me get me kicked off of here.But I cannot standby and let this stuff go on in a website devoted to God.This may be the last time we speak,so I am praying for all of you,that you find your way back to the light.

-Jesusposse-

No one here is trying to "explain away" what the bible says. Give us something that the bible says (actual verses) that posters here are trying to "explain away". You may be relying too heavily on your personal interpretations.

 

[AirPo]

So, no, no one is saying what you posted.

Actually, plenty of people are saying that. They just happen to be creationists.

 

[AirPo]

I will have sent a letter to one of the Aministraters that me get me kicked off of here.But I cannot standby and let this stuff go on in a website devoted to God.
-Jesusposse-

If you can't stand the heat...