Evolution vs. Creationism

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Fossil records show what as gone extinct. Where does it show what has become into being.

You think it is just a coincidence that there are no whales in the same strata as sea-going reptiles, no condors in the same strata as pterodactyles?

Why aren't there any proto-mammals before the Permian strata? And few if any mammals before the Jurassic?

Look in the Everglades, cougars, alligators, turtles, deer, eels, fish, all living in near proximity. But in the Jurassic you're hard pressed to find a mammal bigger than a house cat.

When fossils start showing up that is a pretty good indicator that somewhere around that time is when the species that left those fossils came into being.

As with anything else, it isn't perfect, but it is still pretty good.

Of course there are those that were thought to be extinct but suddenly there they are.

Yes, and how many cases of those are there?
OTOH have you seen any dinosaurs lately (aside from birds)?

I know im spelling exstinct wrong

I am not one to be picky about spelling but since you brought it up, you really need to work on your capitalization, typos and such. Invest in a pocket dictionary too, I would be dead meat without mine.

How do evolutionist get by the fact that yoou need two species one male one female to reproduce. and how would mutations create this in a way that fits each other perfectly.

A species is relatively successful and spreads until one group (a subpopulation) is in a significantly different area from the main population of the species. Over time small changes occur, some mutations, but also variations that already existed and those changes spread throughout the subpopulation.

At no point are the differences between members of the subpopulation great enough to prevent successful mating, but over time the differences add up to the point where the great- great- .... grand children of the original subpopulation can no longer successfully mate with members of the original population.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

I hear that the church has made so much progress that they are not burning them at the stake for that now a days.

The RCC is not my favorite entity (I am Lutheran after all) but the fact is that for witches at least most of the burning at the stake was done in border areas where neither Church nor State had strong control.

 

[Dark_Lite]

They have to teach it. The graduating students will be tested on it in order to qualify to receive a high school degree. How convenient that the pope says it is ok to teach it in the catholic schools sense they are required by law to teach it.

.....

Yes, I'm sure that is the only reason he speaks approvingly of evolution.

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

 

[william jay schroeder]

You think it is just a coincidence that there are no whales in the same strata as sea-going reptiles, no condors in the same strata as pterodactyles?

Why aren't there any proto-mammals before the Permian strata? And few if any mammals before the Jurassic?

Look in the Everglades, cougars, alligators, turtles, deer, eels, fish, all living in near proximity. But in the Jurassic you're hard pressed to find a mammal bigger than a house cat.

When fossils start showing up that is a pretty good indicator that somewhere around that time is when the species that left those fossils came into being.

As with anything else, it isn't perfect, but it is still pretty good.
Yes, and how many cases of those are there?
OTOH have you seen any dinosaurs lately (aside from birds)?
I am not one to be picky about spelling but since you brought it up, you really need to work on your capitalization, typos and such. Invest in a pocket dictionary too, I would be dead meat without mine.


A species is relatively successful and spreads until one group (a subpopulation) is in a significantly different area from the main population of the species. Over time small changes occur, some mutations, but also variations that already existed and those changes spread throughout the subpopulation.

At no point are the differences between members of the subpopulation great enough to prevent successful mating, but over time the differences add up to the point where the great- great- .... grand children of the original subpopulation can no longer successfully mate with members of the original population.

I believe that small creatures decompose at a much higher rate than very large ones. which is why a mammals smaller than a cat isnt found. most dinosaur bones are not found fully intact they are pieced together with just a relative few pieces. so even these decompose guickly. you totally avoided the statement of sexes, and went straight to their being different sexes and explaining it from their. sounds like a politician, a lot of words to avoid the actual guestion.

 

[CypressLB]

E

 

[ProtestantDan]

you totally avoided the statement of sexes, and went straight to their being different sexes and explaining it from their. sounds like a politician, a lot of words to avoid the actual guestion.

Please see my comments about genders in animals at the bottom of the previous page.

 

[ProtestantDan]

The RCC is not my favorite entity (I am Lutheran after all) but the fact is that for witches at least most of the burning at the stake was done in border areas where neither Church nor State had strong control.

I'd just like to mention one name:

Jan Hus (although I've seen it spelled John Hus, John Huss, Jan Hus and Jan Huss, apparently spelling and consistency wasn't as big a deal then as it was now, though with the advent of the internet you could make the argument that it still isn't important.)

 

[Konnie]

C. Creationism is right and evolution is wrong. That's all I've got to say about that.

 

[Event Horizon]

C. Creationism is right and evolution is wrong. That's all I've got to say about that.

Short, simple, but not true in the light of science; no disrespect intended.

 

[ProtestantDan]

C. Creationism is right and evolution is wrong. That's all I've got to say about that.

Funny this should come up. We were discussion basically this same notion in my biology class. We were discussing evolution when one girl said "I believe in God and that's that!" The world operates on evidence to support conclusions, and while I believe you have every right to your belief, for the sake of discussion I'd like to see some evidence. Or don't show evidence, but don't get angry when I present evidence and don't get mad if I don't change my ideas. Most importantly, don't tell me I'm not a Christian because I don't take the Bible literally in Genesis. I've had people do that on several occasions. Tolerance and acceptance is a chief maxim of Christianity and I always try to the best of my ability to carry out and promote tolerance, although sometimes the heat of debate can get the better of me!

 

[william jay schroeder]

Funny this should come up. We were discussion basically this same notion in my biology class. We were discussing evolution when one girl said "I believe in God and that's that!" The world operates on evidence to support conclusions, and while I believe you have every right to your belief, for the sake of discussion I'd like to see some evidence. Or don't show evidence, but don't get angry when I present evidence and don't get mad if I don't change my ideas. Most importantly, don't tell me I'm not a Christian because I don't take the Bible literally in Genesis. I've had people do that on several occasions. Tolerance and acceptance is a chief maxim of Christianity and I always try to the best of my ability to carry out and promote tolerance, although sometimes the heat of debate can get the better of me!

what information proves evolution, all you get is species now that do things which could posibly explain how evolution could have happened with random mutations natural selection and a whole lot of time. doesnt prove nothing just proves its a idea that fesible, though i would disagree.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

You think it is just a coincidence that there are no whales in the same strata as sea-going reptiles, no condors in the same strata as pterodactyles?[...]
But in the Jurassic you're hard pressed to find a mammal bigger than a house cat.

I believe that small creatures decompose at a much higher rate than very large ones. which is why a mammals smaller than a cat isnt found.

Please tell me how what you wrote applies to what I wrote?

most dinosaur bones are not found fully intact they are pieced together with just a relative few pieces. so even these decompose guickly.

At no point are the differences between members of the subpopulation great enough to prevent successful mating

you totally avoided the statement of sexes, and went straight to their being different sexes and explaining it from their. sounds like a politician, a lot of words to avoid the actual guestion.

Go back and read what I wrote, carefully. Try to explain to us exactly what it is that you don't understand.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

I'd just like to mention one name:

Jan Hus (although I've seen it spelled John Hus, John Huss, Jan Hus and Jan Huss, apparently spelling and consistency wasn't as big a deal then as it was now, though with the advent of the internet you could make the argument that it still isn't important.)

Which part of 'most' didn't you understand?

The RCC is and has been, IMO, seriously flawed. However it is also true that their faults have been exagurated over the years.

 

[ProtestantDan]

Which part of 'most' didn't you understand?

The RCC is and has been, IMO, seriously flawed. However it is also true that their faults have been exagurated over the years.

I agree with you for the most part. I just wanted to point out one historical person whose story really pulls at my heartstrings. There should make a movie about him. Does one already exist?

 

[ProtestantDan]

what information proves evolution, all you get is species now that do things which could posibly explain how evolution could have happened with random mutations natural selection and a whole lot of time. doesnt prove nothing just proves its a idea that fesible, though i would disagree.

That little personal speech was not intended to prove or disprove evolution. If you'd like to see some proof, check my previous posts on the matter or some of the other great posts by people with the same opinions as me.

 

[william jay schroeder]

That little personal speech was not intended to prove or disprove evolution. If you'd like to see some proof, check my previous posts on the matter or some of the other great posts by people with the same opinions as me.

it wasnt directed just to you. nothing evolutionist show as proof is proof its just what is happening right now. they throw in assumptions and millions of years and whala evolution. there isnt anything going on in us or organisms that couldnt have gone on in the past. telling me what is happening in organism is fine telling me it show proof of evolution is silly. Mass infomation no confermation

 

[mjiracek]

Tolerance and acceptance is a chief maxim of Christianity and I always try to the best of my ability to carry out and promote tolerance, although sometimes the heat of debate can get the better of me!



I hear that alot... where is the bible does it say tolerate and accept everybody? i know it says take care of the poor but it also says preach the gospel to all nations. Just one gospel, not gospels. Jesus also said i am the way, not one of many ways. LEts not always assocciate Chritianity with lasseiz faire tolerance

 

[mjiracek]

opps C

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

How do evolutionist get by the fact that yoou need two species one male one female to reproduce. and how would mutations create this in a way that fits each other perfectly.

Okay, after some sleep and reflection I think I'm ready to take another shot at this.

First off, evolution does not occur to individuals, in occurs to populations.

With certain rare exceptions a new species does not appear in a single generation. A single mutation does not generally prevent the individual with that mutation from successfully mating with other members of that individual's species. If the mutation is increases the chances of the individual successfully reproducing then that mutation will spread through the population.

Over a number of generations a number of mutations may occur and spread throughout an entire sub-population of a species with the cummulative result that they would no longer be able to reproduce with members of the originating species.

As I said "At no point are the differences between members of the subpopulation great enough to prevent successful mating."

I just wanted to add that the above is a very bare bones explanation of how speciation takes place.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

it wasnt directed just to you. nothing evolutionist show as proof is proof its just what is happening right now. they throw in assumptions and millions of years and whala evolution. there isnt anything going on in us or organisms that couldnt have gone on in the past. telling me what is happening in organism is fine telling me it show proof of evolution is silly. Mass infomation no confermation

In post 652 of this thread I briefly outlined the evidence for evolution and against the belief that "evolutionist ... just throw in millions of years."
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=10778623&postcount=652

One of the links I provided was the following:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/

One of the examples given is the case of GLO deficency.

Very briefly, monkeys, apes and humans share a non-functional gene, and the commonality of the errors that accumulated in that gene is greater for species that appear physiologically to be more closely related, i.e. the errors look just as they would if we evolved from a common ancestor.

Somewhat less briefly:
The production of vitamin C is controlled by several genes, but one in particular produces an enzyme, L-gulonolactone oxidase (GLO), that is required for the last step in the production of vitamin C.

All species of mammals that have been examined* have, as is expected, a nearly identical gene for producing GLO in essentially the same spot on the chromosomes.
(*It is fairly expensive to do this kind of work so not every of the thousands of species of mammals have been examined)

But monkeys, apes and humans don't produce GLO, we don't produce our own vitamin C.

An examination of DNA from a human, a chimpanzee, a gorilla, an orangutang and an old world monkey demonstrated that all had the same mutation in the start portion of the gene that produced GLO.

A mutation in the start portion of a gene will generally prevent that gene from being activated at all. In contrast a mutation in the middle of a gene is likely to cause the gene to misbehave, in this case it might create an enzyme that would mal-function rendering the vitamin-C percurser useless, or attacking some other useful bio-chemical, thus a mutation in the middle of the gene will tend to disappear from the gene pool altogether while "merely" stopping the gene in circumstances where there is plenty of vitamin C available from food will allow that mutation to be passed on, and for that non-functional gene to accumulate mutations.

By examining the physiology of the great apes, orangutangs had been placed farthest from humans, then gorillas, with chimpanzees closest and of course monkeys are even farther than orangutangs. In examining the DNA (in particular the gene dealing with vitamin C but other parts as well) it was found that humans share many of the same mutations that chimpanzees have, and that we share fewer with gorillas, fewer still with orangutangs and fewest with the monkey.

Which is what we expect if we evolved from a common ancestor. For some period of time mutations would accumulate which we would share, then as species branched off the mutations they accumulated would be unique to them, while our branch would continue to accumulate mutations unique to ours.

Again, the point here is that we share a non-functional gene and that the differences in the mutations that accumulated in each of the species are what we would expect if descended from a common ancestor in exactly the manner that was predicted by looking at the physiology of the species.