• 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.

Just for final clarification yes, we evolved from monkeys.

RedPonyDriver

Professional Pot Stirrer
Oct 18, 2014
3,525
2,427
USA
✟83,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Democrat
My, my--you sound angry. I did not call you heathen, You called yourself that. I may not understand the new "evolutionist Christian" view for in my youth there was never any such thing--you were either a creationist or an evolutionist---the morphing of the 2 is a recent thing that I discovered on this site. I am obviously a little behind the times. Perhaps, just to save time, you might want to just tell me what accusations I leveled at you as it seems you've been leveling many at me. But I do like the way you phrase things---"the inside track on that freeway to paradise"----quite poetic.

When I was a kid...the first time my parents heard about this creationism stuff, my mother said something about "los estupido cristianas que no tiene un cerebro en la cabeza". I was maybe 4-5 years old (so the late 60's?). I never heard this stuff being taken seriously until the mid-90's when I fired the fundamentalist jerk who wouldn't stop preaching long enough to do his job. His "pastor" chose to "visit me" at my place of business...right up until I had him forsably removed and charged with trespassing, illegal entry of a business, etc. and managed to make the charges stick.

Go look back at the various threads we've sparred on...you got right nasty with me on many occasions...I know I reported a few of your posts for what you assumed. Now...one last time. Creationism is not rational, nor does it have any basis in any form of scientific fact or theory. Saying "it's in the bible" doesn't work as a proof. That's not how proofs work.

Now...I am done with this discussion...because it's fairly obvious that not a single creationist here can come up with anything intelligent to refute the TOE.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
No...chimpanzees...and if God has an incorporeal body, how are we created in His image. The part about His image is having the "breath of life" in us...as in man is a living soul. It has nothing to do with the meatsack that surrounds our soul/spirit. Another huge miss in understanding Genesis.

An image is not a clone--it is no more an exact replica than Ken and Barbie are the exact replica of man and woman. Even a corn cobb doll is made in the image of man. And we are as far apart from being "God like" as that corn cobb doll is to us. Yes, we have His breath of life, the same breath He gave to every living thing. Only difference is we believe He gave it to a pile of dust and I guess you believe He gave it to a cell billions of years ago.
So, I may sound like s country bumpkin for my believes, that's just a cross I'll have to bear. As for keeping other Christians away---well, if that's all it takes, then they don't have much to hang on to in the 1st place. Every one is free to believe whatever they want---so far anyway. I always thought it was the believe in an everlasting burning hell that drove many Christians away. I don't believe in that. Now there's a myth many evolutionists stick to for some reason.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Go look back at the various threads we've sparred on...you got right nasty with me on many occasions...I know I reported a few of your posts for what you assumed. Now...one last time. Creationism is not rational, nor does it have any basis in any form of scientific fact or theory. Saying "it's in the bible" doesn't work as a proof. That's not how proofs work.

Oh my---I've been only reported a very few times, like 4-- and I don't remember your being one of those, but I have been known to get quite sarcastic at times---it's a bad streak in me. My first was a horrible rant against somebody who was blaming rape victims for their plight and I came undone at her. I was in the wrong for unleashing at her the way I did. I'll have to watch out for you so I don't get nasty again to you. Sorry.
No creationism is not rational----neither is the Exodus, burning bushes, being healed by looking at a snake, 3 Gods yet only one God, a 90 year old woman having a baby, the flood, Jesus being born of a virgin, water into wine, raising the dead, Jesus returning and taking us to heaven, God remaking the earth and the heavens and His city coming down here. I mean have you really tried to think about how big that city says it is? And the gates being made of one pearl--are you kidding, can you imagine the size of that oyster? And this whole thing about an everlasting burning hell---there is always a thread in defense of it. I'd like to see anyone prove any of this stuff!
OK---I agree, I am getting a little sarcastic there. Tired, time for another pain pill. Good night.
 
Upvote 0

RedPonyDriver

Professional Pot Stirrer
Oct 18, 2014
3,525
2,427
USA
✟83,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Democrat
No creationism is not rational----neither is the Exodus, burning bushes, being healed by looking at a snake, 3 Gods yet only one God, a 90 year old woman having a baby, the flood, Jesus being born of a virgin, water into wine, raising the dead, Jesus returning and taking us to heaven, God remaking the earth and the heavens and His city coming down here. I mean have you really tried to think about how big that city says it is? And the gates being made of one pearl--are you kidding, can you imagine the size of that oyster? And this whole thing about an everlasting burning hell---there is always a thread in defense of it. I'd like to see anyone prove any of this stuff!

None of it is rational nor does it make any sense...so why believe it?
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Like I said----it's called faith. And that you can not manufacture. I believe in God, I believe in the bible, and none of it is provable. So, that is why atheists are atheists and believer are believers and never the twain shall meet. Not in debates, anyway. Is there a scientific explanation for believing what is not rational? Other than insanity that is. There will come a day when we will all find out what is and what isn't.
 
Upvote 0

RedPonyDriver

Professional Pot Stirrer
Oct 18, 2014
3,525
2,427
USA
✟83,676.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Democrat
Is there a scientific explanation for believing what is not rational? Other than insanity that is. There will come a day when we will all find out what is and what isn't.

Insanity is a good word however I prefer irrationality, ignorance and pig-headedness.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,820
74
Las Vegas
✟263,478.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Yep--that's a Christian for you. Now, which of those things that are irrational, do you, as a Christian believe? That there is a God, according to evolutionists, makes no sense at all, and is only for the ignorant, irrational and narrow-minded. Do you believe there is a God? You must, it says you are a Christian. Why? Can you prove, scientifically there is a God? can you prove there are 3 Gods in one? Can you prove the virgin birth of Jesus? Can you prove He made water into wine, that He healed anybody, that he rose from the dead? Can you scientifically prove any of this?? Can you scientifically prove that there is a heaven, that the dead will one day be resurrected? Can you scientifically prove there is a hell? Why are you a Christian??
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,319
9,098
65
✟432,759.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Of course they will be relative close, the main issue is there is the genetic drift, mutations that have acumulated on both the human and monkey DNA since the split, it's why say with DNA comparisons you can get anywhere from 5% to 95% simularities with chimpanzee's, because line up the DNA and a single added pair can throw the entire strand out of alignment, so you look at the encoding areas, but given the drift they still line up and beyond anything that would be random. Scientists understand these things and look at how they work out.
Again you assume there was,a spilt. You state it as a fact. A fact has to be proven. Since you can't prove It, you can't say it actually happened.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,319
9,098
65
✟432,759.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
You suffer from some horrid misunderstandings...

Here's a fact.......when we take a measured volume of air and have a person breathe it in and then exhale afterwards, we find that there is a decreased level of oxygen in that expelled air. That's a fact...a provisional 'truth', because every time we measure that phenomenon, we get a similar result......there is less oxygen present when someone breathes out, than when they breathe in.

Here's the theory related to that (actually an hypothesis, but the example still serves).....humans extract oxygen from the air during respiration. Now, that theory is tentative. It is not "proven", as is the case for every hypothesis and theory in science! Someone may find an alternative explanation for why that oxygen level changes that doesn't involve extraction during respiration, so our understanding holds until that time.

Facts are what we observe. Theories provide explanations for those facts. Both are tentative.

Are you getting this.....?
Problem you cant,do,any that with evolution. You can't measure or observe any of it. That's a fact that can be proven. Evidence is always assumed in evolution. DNA is different between us and monkeys. It is assumed that the differences are small enough evidence. They are not. Yes my kids and I don't have exactly the same DNA, but The human DNA is so significantly different to do that we can build cities, have universities, make medical discoveries, fly to the moon and make atomic bombs. So we are so different that the DNA is not relevant and no evidence,of evolution. Unless of course you assume it is.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
28,319
9,098
65
✟432,759.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Oh good grief...there are creation myths that PREDATE the writing of the Genesis account.
The bible is not a science textbook. The bible is not factual when it comes to creation. The Epic of Gilgamesh pretty much says the same thing and it predates the bible.
Evolution is pretty much proven whether you like it or not.

And according to you I'm a "heathen" because I'm not a fundamentalist bible-worshipping narrow-minded, science-hating anti-intellectual like many around here.

Wow, I'm not sure that was speech always with grace. It sounded like you were really putting her down. It wasn't kind.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JonFromMinnesota

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2015
2,171
1,608
Minnesota
✟60,266.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Problem you cant,do,any that with evolution. You can't measure or observe any of it

There have been thousands of experiments that have observed evolution happening.

Evidence is always assumed in evolution

"ASSUMPTIONS!" Is not a magical word you can use to make the overwhelming, mountains of evidence disappear.

It is assumed that the differences are small enough evidence. They are not.

You're smarter than geneticists that have dedicated their lives to studying DNA? I think not.

Yes my kids and I don't have exactly the same DNA, but The human DNA is so significantly different to do that we can build cities, have universities, make medical discoveries, fly to the moon and make atomic bombs. So we are so different that the DNA is not relevant and no evidence,of evolution. Unless of course you assume it is.

WOWWWWW. You don't know what DNA is do you?....
The Dunning-Kruger is strong in you.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I may not understand the new "evolutionist Christian" view for in my youth there was never any such thing--you were either a creationist or an evolutionist---the morphing of the 2 is a recent thing that I discovered on this site. I am obviously a little behind the times. Perhaps, just to save time, you might want to just tell me what accusations I leveled at you as it seems you've been leveling many at me. But I do like the way you phrase things---"the inside track on that freeway to paradise"----quite poetic.

Christendom is much more expansive than the church you grew up in. Many Christians have accepted deep time (in fact many of the early geologists in the 18th and 19th centuries had training in theology) and evolution for a long time. Catholics, especially those who are educated by Jesuits have been accepting it for many decades.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RedPonyDriver
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Again you assume there was,a spilt. You state it as a fact. A fact has to be proven. Since you can't prove It, you can't say it actually happened.

You keep using "assume" like it's a magic word that makes the evidence disappear in a cloud of smoke.

It doesn't.

You also need to learn proper scientific verbiage if you want to discuss a scientific topic.
----------------------------------------
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html
Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
...but The human DNA is so significantly different to do that we can build cities, have universities, make medical discoveries, fly to the moon and make atomic bombs. So we are so different that the DNA is not relevant and no evidence,of evolution. Unless of course you assume it is.

You really have no idea what you're blathering about.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RedPonyDriver
Upvote 0

Commander

A son of God.
Apr 10, 2015
830
99
Oklahoma
✟16,562.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You really have no idea what you're blathering about.
Most others here don't either.
Google-genetically we did not come from apes and you will find about 12,200,000 results.
Final proof we did not originate from apes!
A new report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
suggests that the common value of >98% similarity of DNA between chimp and humans is incorrect.2 Roy Britten, author of the study, puts the figure at about 95% when insertions and deletions are included. Importantly, there is much more to these studies than people realize.
The >98.5% similarity has been misleading because it depends on what is being compared. There are a number of significant differences. A review by Gagneux and Varki4 described a list of genetic differences between humans and the great apes. The differences include ‘cytogenetic differences, differences in the type and number of repetitive genomic DNA and transposable elements, abundance and distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the presence and extent of allelic polymorphisms, specific gene inactivation events, gene sequence differences, gene duplications, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene expression differences, and messenger RNA splicing variations.’4
Specific examples of these differences include:
1. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.
2. At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.7
3. While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’5 In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
4. The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.1
5. Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed ‘large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.’ They found a number of regions that ‘might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.’3
These types of differences are not generally included in calculations of percent DNA similarity.
In one of the most extensive studies comparing human and chimp DNA,3 the researchers compared >19.8 million bases. While this sounds like a lot, it still represents slightly less than 1% of the genome. They calculated a mean identity of 98.77% or 1.23% differences. However, this, like other studies only considered substitutions and did not take insertions or deletions into account as the new study by Britten did. A nucleotide substitution is a mutation where one base (A, G, C, or T) is replaced with another. An insertion or deletion (indel) is found where there are nucleotides missing when two sequences are compared.": https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=152540 Have a blessed day.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I had to double-check who he was since I'd heard the name before. Is it any surprise he chose him to copy from though?

And the weird part is that's the one he chose when he got 12,000,000 hits for "genetically we did not come from apes" That tells me also doesn't know how Google works.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,195
7,476
31
Wales
✟428,792.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
And the weird part is that's the one he chose when he got 12,000,000 hits for "genetically we did not come from apes" That tells me also doesn't know how Google works.

I did want to point that out, but with him, I doubt that it would matter.
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Site Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,070
16,820
Dallas
✟918,891.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Most others here don't either.
Google-genetically we did not come from apes and you will find about 12,200,000 results.
Final proof we did not originate from apes!
A new report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
suggests that the common value of >98% similarity of DNA between chimp and humans is incorrect.2 Roy Britten, author of the study, puts the figure at about 95% when insertions and deletions are included. Importantly, there is much more to these studies than people realize.
The >98.5% similarity has been misleading because it depends on what is being compared. There are a number of significant differences. A review by Gagneux and Varki4 described a list of genetic differences between humans and the great apes. The differences include ‘cytogenetic differences, differences in the type and number of repetitive genomic DNA and transposable elements, abundance and distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the presence and extent of allelic polymorphisms, specific gene inactivation events, gene sequence differences, gene duplications, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene expression differences, and messenger RNA splicing variations.’4
Specific examples of these differences include:
1. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes while chimpanzees have 24. Evolutionary scientists believe that one of the human chromosomes has been formed through the fusion of two small chromosomes in the chimp instead of an intrinsic difference resulting from a separate creation.
2. At the end of each chromosome is a string of repeating DNA sequences called a telomere. Chimpanzees and other apes have about 23 kilobases (a kilobase is 1,000 base pairs of DNA) of repeats. Humans are unique among primates with much shorter telomeres only 10 kilobases long.7
3. While 18 pairs of chromosomes are ‘virtually identical’, chromosomes 4, 9 and 12 show evidence of being ‘remodeled.’5 In other words, the genes and markers on these chromosomes are not in the same order in the human and chimpanzee. Instead of ‘being remodeled’ as the evolutionists suggest, these could, logically, also be intrinsic differences because of a separate creation.
4. The Y chromosome in particular is of a different size and has many markers that do not line up between the human and chimpanzee.1
5. Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed ‘large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.’ They found a number of regions that ‘might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage.’3
These types of differences are not generally included in calculations of percent DNA similarity.
In one of the most extensive studies comparing human and chimp DNA,3 the researchers compared >19.8 million bases. While this sounds like a lot, it still represents slightly less than 1% of the genome. They calculated a mean identity of 98.77% or 1.23% differences. However, this, like other studies only considered substitutions and did not take insertions or deletions into account as the new study by Britten did. A nucleotide substitution is a mutation where one base (A, G, C, or T) is replaced with another. An insertion or deletion (indel) is found where there are nucleotides missing when two sequences are compared.": https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=152540 Have a blessed day.

@sfs Any thoughts on this post?
 
Upvote 0