• 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.

How can you prove evolution?

h2whoa

Ace2whoa - resident geneticist
Sep 21, 2004
2,573
286
43
Manchester, UK
✟4,091.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Nathan Poe said:
You don't see too many apes out in that weather, do you?

Maybe they're smarter than us after all: If you don't like the climate, MIGRATE!
Redundant. False dichotomy.

Col... erm I mean h2.
 
Upvote 0

Ondoher

Veteran
Sep 17, 2004
1,812
52
✟2,246.00
Faith
Atheist
awstar said:
So if a billion human babies were born and not one of them had wings so that it could fly, you would not have proven evolution theory to be false, but it's reasonable to believe that it might be flawed?
Why would it be reasonable to believe something is flawed that is supported by all evidence and appears to have no flaws?
 
Upvote 0
Sopharos said:
...
False, like I have demonstrated in another thread:

Actually, mutations is adequate in meeting this demand. There are many kinds of mutations: Deletion, Duplication, Inversion, Insertion and Translocation.

attachment.php


Picture source: Wikipedia

One causes a loss in formation, two are neutral and two cause a gain. All are observed. In fact, Translocation can also cause a gain in information:

attachment.php




Wrong again. For this segment of this post, I would like you to keep very well in mind this table as I go through the processes by which DNA mutations gain totally new information. Each of the boxes in this table represents an amino acid. The left of the box represents the codon series of three rybonucleic bases on the transfer RNA (tRNA) which instructs rybosomes how to produce a chain of polypeptide (protein). AUG produces Met, or Methionine, which signals the start of ALL protein chains, while UAA, UAG, UGA signals the rybosome to cease coding.

code.gif


Now, let's say we have a line of code that goes AUG-CAU-GAU-CGA-AAG-UCA-UAG. This codes into Met-His-Asp-Arg-Lys-Ser-Stop. Below are diagrams demonstrating each of the types of mutations shown in the diagram in the above segment of the post can produce "totally" new information:

attachment.php


The mechanisms for BOTH increasing the VOLUME of information AND creating of NEW information for new amino acids being coded in new places have been demonstrated. So where, then, is this "magic barrier" to prevent macroevolution from occuring?
See, sopharos, this makes perfect sense to me, and probably to most of the users of this forum. However, to those without an education in genetics beyond what a High School offers, those pictures make no sense.
 
Upvote 0

kingreaper

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2004
814
22
✟1,055.00
Faith
Atheist
HRE said:
See, sopharos, this makes perfect sense to me, and probably to most of the users of this forum. However, to those without an education in genetics beyond what a High School offers, those pictures make no sense.
Actually, not much biology is needed to understand what those depict, only a bit of logic

Unfortunately thats also in very short supply
 
Upvote 0

Tomk80

Titleless
Apr 27, 2004
11,570
429
45
Maastricht
Visit site
✟36,582.00
Faith
Agnostic
HRE said:
See, sopharos, this makes perfect sense to me, and probably to most of the users of this forum. However, to those without an education in genetics beyond what a High School offers, those pictures make no sense.
In that case they should study it if they want to be part of the debate. I'd say that the figure isn't to hard to understand when studying it.
 
Upvote 0

Magnus Vile

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2004
2,507
212
✟26,190.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Nathan Poe said:
You don't see too many apes out in that weather, do you?

Maybe they're smarter than us after all: If you don't like the climate, MIGRATE!

I did :D

(Though I should poiint out, I actually prefer colder weather to the weather here in Florida)

And you don't see many other apes out in that weather, which might be considered smarter except that other apes don't have anything like the range of humans. Clothing can take the place of fur when it is needed and gives us a wider range of enviromaents we can survive in.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Magnus Vile said:
And you don't see many other apes out in that weather, which might be considered smarter except that other apes don't have anything like the range of humans. Clothing can take the place of fur when it is needed and gives us a wider range of enviromaents we can survive in.
My point exactly: Clothing is a convenience, not an evolutionary requirement
 
Upvote 0

awstar

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
480
83
✟36,138.00
Faith
Methodist
Why would an ape require clothes?

kingreaper said:
To more easily adapt to a range of different climates of course

How fortunate us clothes requiring apes also evolved into apes who were smart enough to sew clothes too!! Could you imagine how humiliating it would be to have to wait for some other animal to evolve into garment makers while we shivered through each winter? What do you suppose evolved first, bare skin with goose bumps or the loin cloth?
 
Upvote 0

h2whoa

Ace2whoa - resident geneticist
Sep 21, 2004
2,573
286
43
Manchester, UK
✟4,091.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
awstar said:
Why would an ape require clothes?



How fortunate us clothes requiring apes also evolved into apes who were smart enough to sew clothes too!! Could you imagine how humiliating it would be to have to wait for some other animal to evolve into garment makers while we shivered through each winter? What do you suppose evolved first, bare skin with goose bumps or the loin cloth?
It's not like they were trying to make an Armani suit. Skin an antelope and throw the fur over yourself. Where's the sewing in that?

h2
 
Upvote 0

kingreaper

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2004
814
22
✟1,055.00
Faith
Atheist
awstar said:
Why would an ape require clothes?



How fortunate us clothes requiring apes also evolved into apes who were smart enough to sew clothes too!! Could you imagine how humiliating it would be to have to wait for some other animal to evolve into garment makers while we shivered through each winter? What do you suppose evolved first, bare skin with goose bumps or the loin cloth?
ERRR

In equatorial regions people don't need much clothing at any time of the year

The "out of africa" hypothesis would support the idea that hairloss was an adaptation to the heat in africa, and as they traveled to colder areas, or just for aaditional protection of deicate body-parts (like the loins) the clothing was then invented

Hairless people in africa still don't generally need much clothing, but hairlesss people in antartica do
 
Upvote 0

Physics_guy

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2003
1,208
66
✟1,687.00
How fortunate us clothes requiring apes also evolved into apes who were smart enough to sew clothes too!! Could you imagine how humiliating it would be to have to wait for some other animal to evolve into garment makers while we shivered through each winter? What do you suppose evolved first, bare skin with goose bumps or the loin cloth?

Shocking how the puddle perfectly fits into the hole in the pavement.
 
Upvote 0

Norseman

EAC Representative
Apr 29, 2004
4,706
256
22
Currently in China
✟28,677.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
TheGreatBongChicken said:
It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

Ergo big sky fairy shaping up some mud, calling it Adam, stealing it's rib, and making trop curieux Eve so he can shag defaults as true?
 
Upvote 0

awstar

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
480
83
✟36,138.00
Faith
Methodist
kingreaper said:
ERRR

In equatorial regions people don't need much clothing at any time of the year

The "out of africa" hypothesis would support the idea that hairloss was an adaptation to the heat in africa, and as they traveled to colder areas, or just for aaditional protection of deicate body-parts (like the loins) the clothing was then invented

Hairless people in africa still don't generally need much clothing, but hairlesss people in antartica do

But what of the ones migrating towards the south pole. Did they evolve in parallel to those migrating towards the north pole?

Or then, can we deduce that all traits common to man and no other animal must of come "out of africa" before migrating -- like a thirst for justice, or the capacity to lie -- for example?
 
Upvote 0