Evolution is a Fact

[AV1611VET]

I thought bearing false witness was a sin. Did you get "Dispensated" for that?

I think I sufficiently demonstrated all three.

It certainly caused you guys some near consternation, so it must have had some impact.

 

[Split Rock]

I think I sufficiently demonstrated all three.

It certainly caused you guys some near consternation, so it must have had some impact.

I guess that means you weren't "dispensated." Maybe you decided to "Indulgisize" the issue or "Crusade" us with false accusations? BTW, When is The Rapture coming again? Its coming, It's coming....

 

[hangback]

It certainly caused you guys some near consternation, so it must have had some impact.

AV1611VET you are confusing consternation with incredulity, some people here are really 'gob smacked' with the things you come out with, wanting to be and stay ignorant is one thing but needing to prove it every time you open your mouth is completely unnecessary.

 

[Ursie]

I couldn't resist coming back. I so enjoy being called a moron you know! LOL

First, I must make a correction for a mistype earlier. I stated that my engineering husband of 17 years has come to the conclusion that logic is the only way to understand anything. What I meant to type was that he has learned that logic is NOT the only way to look at information. Often, logical analysis can be quite a barrier as the world is made up of many things that we can't see. Love, wind, etc.

Secondly, after pondering the discussion, I still have two questions that have not been answered.

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build. If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next. Not drawings, hard, real material. All I've ever seen, and what Thaumatergy offered in his link to 29 proofs are drawings. That is NOT hard proof. How can you possibly say it is? If I bring you some green slime and say it came from a martian, you're gonna ask to see that martian. If I can't produce it then you're gonna debunk it. Show me. Not just a bunch of high sounding words that amount to nothing, show me the physical proof. Every bit of 'proof' I've ever seen in any book consists of drawings. Or one picture of one thing. These things require great detail to prove.

Show me.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I couldn't resist coming back. I so enjoy being called a moron you know! LOL

Who called you a moron?

First, I must make a correction for a mistype earlier. I stated that my engineering husband of 17 years has come to the conclusion that logic is the only way to understand anything.

Seems a bit extreme, unless you married a Vulcan.

What I meant to type was that he has learned that logic is NOT the only way to look at information. Often, logical analysis can be quite a barrier as the world is made up of many things that we can't see. Love, wind, etc.

Except that we can logically explain these things -- even if we don't logically experience them (except for wind).

Secondly, after pondering the discussion, I still have two questions that have not been answered.

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build.

Not necessarily. Evolution begins with the existence of life -- where that life originally came from doesn't matter.

If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

Nor did mommy and daddy printer copuate and make little baby printers -- see the difference?

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next. Not drawings, hard, real material.

Is that all?

Question: If I took a series of pictures of a ball rolling down a hill, would you reject this as proof of gravity because I don't have pictures of every last millimeter the ball traveled?

 

[Ursie]

Who called you a moron?




Seems a bit extreme, unless you married a Vulcan.



Except that we can logically explain these things -- even if we don't logically experience them (except for wind).



Not necessarily. Evolution begins with the existence of life -- where that life originally came from doesn't matter.



Nor did mommy and daddy printer copuate and make little baby printers -- see the difference?



Is that all?

Question: If I took a series of pictures of a ball rolling down a hill, would you reject this as proof of gravity because I don't have pictures of every last millimeter the ball traveled?

Um, that's not an answer to my question.

If you care to go back a few pages you'll find that I was called moron more than once, but it's okay, I can take it.

LOL, sometimes, we've wondered if he has Vulcan blood, but no, really, he's an awesome guy, but very logical and analytical.

Are you suggesting that there is empirical evidence for every single thing that can be known, experienced, etc?

 

[Hawk007]

Is that all?

Question: If I took a series of pictures of a ball rolling down a hill, would you reject this as proof of gravity because I don't have pictures of every last millimeter the ball traveled?

If fossils were balls you might have a point, but I beg to differ ......if they can find bones millions of years old they should be able to find bones not so old.....

 

[rjw]

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build. If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

If not being able to explain the ultimate origin of anything is fatal to evolution, then equally it is fatal to all scientific explanations. With all scientific explanations, we cannot explain the ultimate origin of their subject matter(s).

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next.

That's a tall order.

How much do you expect:-

1) fossilization processes and
2) geological processes

to be able to deliver us what you require? Why should they? As far as we know, successful fossilization of a bone is very rare and rocks remaining undisturbed over geological eons is most unlikely.

Should we accept that you have no ancestors beyond, say, your 10th set of grandparents, given that you cannot show us the all the bones of all ancestor going back further?


However, the observation of the nested hierarchy at both the morphological and the molecular level, is a very good piece of evidence that unites all extant and extinct animals via a process of common descent with modification (read evolution).



Regards, Roland

 

[MoonLancer]

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build.

Ask yourself, Does one need to show the organ of mass to demonstrate gravity exists? Like wise one does not need to show abiogenesis to demonstrate that evolution exists.

If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

and the reason we know the printer was created is because its self evident. The only reason its self evident is because its something created contrasted in a world of things that are not. If life on earth and the earth itself was created, the printer would not stand out as being created, it would blend in. The watch in the forest argument is a really really bad one. (which is where your argument is derived from is it not)

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next. Not drawings, hard, real material.

Here. A is clearly not human, and N is clearly human. What are the skulls in between?

 

[hangback]

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build. If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

Firstly I think you have been sat in that pew listening for too long, try walking around and looking at the world and thinking a little more.
Where or how it all began has ABSOLUTLY NOTHING to do with evolution, evolution only comes into play when there is LIFE.

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next. Not drawings, hard, real material. All I've ever seen, and what Thaumatergy offered in his link to 29 proofs are drawings. That is NOT hard proof. How can you possibly say it is? If I bring you some green slime and say it came from a martian, you're gonna ask to see that martian. If I can't produce it then you're gonna debunk it. Show me. Not just a bunch of high sounding words that amount to nothing, show me the physical proof. Every bit of 'proof' I've ever seen in any book consists of drawings. Or one picture of one thing. These things require great detail to prove.

Show me.

Show you??? why should anyone show you? are you a fool? do you need someone else to show you everything? it's your life so you must find out what it's all about for yourself, make your own decisions, make up your own mind, stop relying on other people to do YOUR thinking for you, wake up.

 

[laconicstudent]

I couldn't resist coming back. I so enjoy being called a moron you know! LOL

That's nice.

First, I must make a correction for a mistype earlier. I stated that my engineering husband of 17 years has come to the conclusion that logic is the only way to understand anything. What I meant to type was that he has learned that logic is NOT the only way to look at information. Often, logical analysis can be quite a barrier as the world is made up of many things that we can't see. Love, wind, etc.[/quote]

That is nice....... Also utter anathema to the scientific method. Don't do it.

Secondly, after pondering the discussion, I still have two questions that have not been answered.

The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build.

No. You explain how your cosmological question would affect biological evolution, then I'll try answering your red-herring of a question.

If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy.

Printers don't have sex and reproduce. They aren't alive. These sort of straw men are boring. We've all seen them a thousand times.

It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?

See above.

Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next. Not drawings, hard, real material

Humans.

. All I've ever seen, and what Thaumatergy offered in his link to 29 proofs are drawings. That is NOT hard proof.

Illustrations aren't meant to be proof, they are meant to illustrate what we think, based on the anatomy of the fossil, the creature would have looked like. They are generally either hypothesized transitional forms, or illustrations based on real fossils.

How can you possibly say it is?

I seriously doubt anyone has ever made a claim that stupid.

If I bring you some green slime and say it came from a martian, you're gonna ask to see that martian. If I can't produce it then you're gonna debunk it. Show me. Not just a bunch of high sounding words that amount to nothing, show me the physical proof. Every bit of 'proof' I've ever seen in any book consists of drawings. Or one picture of one thing. These things require great detail to prove. Show me

Fine. Here. Ardipithecus

Australiopithecus

(of course, I doubt you'll even grasp the significance, and how amazing Australiopithecus is, and how cool it is that we have an entire hip bone, but whatever)

Homo Erectus

Homo Ergaster

Homo Habilis

Homo Neanderthalis

There. I hope we're done with this absurd claim that transitional forms don't exist in the fossil record. I hope you realize that I've tapped literally not even a fraction of the fossils that exist in these pictures. I also had Homo Rudolfensis, but it was too big to fit and doing ugly things to the thread.

 

[Ursie]

If fossils were balls you might have a point, but I beg to differ ......if they can find bones millions of years old they should be able to find bones not so old.....

Indeed! Good point.

 

[hangback]

if they can find bones millions of years old they should be able to find bones not so old.....

They do, graveyards are full of them.

 

[laconicstudent]

If fossils were balls you might have a point, but I beg to differ ......if they can find bones millions of years old they should be able to find bones not so old.....

................................................


Look what I found. Amazing 5,000-year-old skeletons laid on bed of flowers found in Sahara - proving desert was once green and lush | Mail Online

And this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...on-discovered-buried-with-horse-in-Italy.html

Your argument becomes somewhat untenable when we do find skeletons that are recent, doesn't it?

 

[Nathan Poe]

If fossils were balls you might have a point, but I beg to differ ......if they can find bones millions of years old they should be able to find bones not so old.....

They have -- how old do you want them?

EDITED TO ADD: Ah, I see those more scientifically literate than me have already provided.

 

[Ursie]

Ask yourself, Does one need to show the organ of mass to demonstrate gravity exists? Like wise one does not need to show abiogenesis to demonstrate that evolution exists.

and the reason we know the printer was created is because its self evident. The only reason its self evident is because its something created contrasted in a world of things that are not. If life on earth and the earth itself was created, the printer would not stand out as being created, it would blend in. The watch in the forest argument is a really really bad one. (which is where your argument is derived from is it not)


Here. A is clearly not human, and N is clearly human. What are the skulls in between?

Not seeing the proof here of anything. Skulls that look human, but could be the human skull of a deformed person do not prove anything. where is the rest of the evidence, the details sir?

Firstly I think you have been sat in that pew listening for too long, try walking around and looking at the world and thinking a little more.
Where or how it all began has ABSOLUTLY NOTHING to do with evolution, evolution only comes into play when there is LIFE.

Show you??? why should anyone show you? are you a fool? do you need someone else to show you everything? it's your life so you must find out what it's all about for yourself, make your own decisions, make up your own mind, stop relying on other people to do YOUR thinking for you, wake up.

Uh oh, more name callling. This is what we always seem to get back to when the answers are not as clear as we'd like them to be isn't it.

That's nice.

First, I must make a correction for a mistype earlier. I stated that my engineering husband of 17 years has come to the conclusion that logic is the only way to understand anything. What I meant to type was that he has learned that logic is NOT the only way to look at information. Often, logical analysis can be quite a barrier as the world is made up of many things that we can't see. Love, wind, etc.

That is nice....... Also utter anathema to the scientific method. Don't do it.




No. You explain how your cosmological question would affect biological evolution, then I'll try answering your red-herring of a question.



Printers don't have sex and reproduce. They aren't alive. These sort of straw men are boring. We've all seen them a thousand times.



See above.



Humans.



Illustrations aren't meant to be proof, they are meant to illustrate what we think, based on the anatomy of the fossil, the creature would have looked like. They are generally either hypothesized transitional forms, or illustrations based on real fossils.



I seriously doubt anyone has ever made a claim that stupid.



Fine. Here. Ardipithecus

Australiopithecus

(of course, I doubt you'll even grasp the significance, and how amazing Australiopithecus is, and how cool it is that we have an entire hip bone, but whatever)

Homo Erectus

Homo Ergaster

Homo Habilis

Homo Neanderthalis

There. I hope we're done with this absurd claim that transitional forms don't exist in the fossil record. I hope you realize that I've tapped literally not even a fraction of the fossils that exist in these pictures. I also had Homo Rudolfensis, but it was too big to fit and doing ugly things to the thread. [/quote]

You're pictures prove absolutely nothing, without hard information and clear evidence of exactly how this lifeform changed from one thing to another, these are still just pictures. If there is such hard proof, then there should be museums, or labs where one can go and see the hard proof, all layed out in a logical order. None of the proofs should be man-made. The processes and changes of the being should be quite evident and each one thoroughly explained so that the students you're trying so hard to convince can clearly see what is going on.

Instead, what happens, you take young students, or older students, set them in front of educated professors with intelligent sounding language and tell them that what you believe is true is actually true. They believe you because you have many sets of letters after your name to prove that you know what you are talking about.

Can't you see that none of this proves anything? It's simply so many men and women talking about what they think is true, and you call anyone who dares disagrees with you an uneducated moron, but you still cannot answer the foundational questions.

As another fellow asked, where are the not so old bones? Why not show us some evidence of a species evolving from a less complex being than a human? How about a worm, surely there is evidence of a worm evolving into something? For goodness sake, we no NOTHING about the human body. Every time we think we no something, someone comes along and does a study to show it was a mistake and that their theory is the correct one, until someone else comes along......

Remember, I'm an uneducated moron so I need you to show me the simple things here. Oh, but no one wants to do that because I should go find it out for myself. If you've got all the answers, it shouldn't be so very difficult to provide them in an understandable form.

That is nice....... Also utter anathema to the scientific method. Don't do it.

Right, because scientific method is the only possible way to have any knowledge. You know absolutely everything you know because you learned it from the scientific method, is that right?

There. I hope we're done with this absurd claim

Once again, using offensive language. If this is an honest discussion, then why is it so necessary to couch every comment in this type of language? Do you truly believe that people are complete idiots who do not agree with you about the THEORY of evolution? I guess must have Darwin's contemporaries must have been morons too. They couldn't possibly have been thinking people with a different conclusion to the evidence at hand.

 

[Ursie]

Oh, and the reason my cosmological question affects biological evolution is that the idea you all found everything on is that life began somehow magically out of nothing, or mabye a big bang, or we're not really sure how. If you don't know where life came from in the first place, how is there life? The idea you proport is that the life came from something organic, which evolved into life, which then evolved into more life and so on. How does that start out of nothing?

God, that's how. You may not believe in Him, but He believes in you. There is no other reasonable explanation for how the universe began besides God, or some call it intelligent design, though that's because they're afraid of being jumped on by the science crowd. But you do not believe because you choose not to (I've heard that accusation flying the other way, so I guess it's a viable argument, eh).

 

[Ursie]

And why are you evolutionists so very angry? Why can you not just allow people to differ from you? Why must you always end with name calling?

 

[laconicstudent]

You're pictures prove absolutely nothing, without hard information and clear evidence of exactly how this lifeform changed from one thing to another, these are still just pictures.

Look, no offense, but I'm not going to pander to willful ignorance. The fossils exist, they have been dated as existing sequentially, and they display change in form. We know mutations lead to novel phenotypes, therefore it was Evolution.

If there is such hard proof, then there should be museums, or labs where one can go and see the hard proof, all layed out in a logical order.

And.... They are. Are you joking? I saw Lucy, Australiopithecus in person a year ago.

None of the proofs should be man-made.

Oh Lord have mercy.... are you seriously going down the wild-eyed conspiracy path. Please stop now, while you at least sound vaguely sane.

The processes and changes of the being should be quite evident and each one thoroughly explained so that the students you're trying so hard to convince can clearly see what is going on.

They are.

Instead, what happens, you take young students, or older students, set them in front of educated professors with intelligent sounding language and tell them that what you believe is true is actually true. They believe you because you have many sets of letters after your name to prove that you know what you are talking about.

Um, we believe them because we can actually understand the material and evidences presented, unlike you. You are being incredibly rude. Before you take on your martyred air, please remember that you are the one accusing us of being liars and gullible.

Can't you see that none of this proves anything? It's simply so many men and women talking about what they think is true, and you call anyone who dares disagrees with you an uneducated moron, but you still cannot answer the foundational questions.

I just did. You simply did not have the requisite level of elementary education to comprehend it, which I think is unfortunate and evidence that our public schools need an overhaul

As another fellow asked, where are the not so old bones? Why not show us some evidence of a species evolving from a less complex being than a human? How about a worm, surely there is evidence of a worm evolving into something?

Why bother? If evolution is true for one species, it is true for all species.

For goodness sake, we no NOTHING about the human body.

I'm going to be honest, if you believe that you are flat out ignorant. We know a great deal.

Every time we think we no something, someone comes along and does a study to show it was a mistake and that their theory is the correct one, until someone else comes along......

That is science. Unlike religion, it makes no claim to mystical infallibility and perfection. This is a common mistake Creationists make in assuming that a laboratory is like a church.

Remember, I'm an uneducated moron so I need you to show me the simple things here. Oh, but no one wants to do that because I should go find it out for myself. If you've got all the answers, it shouldn't be so very difficult to provide them in an understandable form.

I already did. I really don't know how I can dumb it down any further, to be honest.

Right, because scientific method is the only possible way to have any knowledge. You know absolutely everything you know because you learned it from the scientific method, is that right?

Not absolutely everything. Only religion makes claims like that. Stop putting words in my mouth. Its annoying, and against forum rules.

Once again, using offensive language. If this is an honest discussion, then why is it so necessary to couch every comment in this type of language?

Because your claim that transitional fossils don't exist is absurd.

Do you truly believe that people are complete idiots who do not agree with you about the THEORY of evolution?

Just ignorant.

I guess must have Darwin's contemporaries must have been morons too.

Hardly. There you go, goading and flaming again.

They couldn't possibly have been thinking people with a different conclusion to the evidence at hand.

A conclusion that was falsified decades ago.

 

[Hawk007]

................................................


Look what I found. Amazing 5,000-year-old skeletons laid on bed of flowers found in Sahara - proving desert was once green and lush | Mail Online

And this: Thousand-year-old Lombard warrior skeleton discovered buried with horse in Italy - Telegraph

Your argument becomes somewhat untenable when we do find skeletons that are recent, doesn't it?

Hahahahaha, and your point is? Are we not talking about evolution? The bones you show is still human, I can go and jump in the grave yard and I am sure I will find a few human bones!