Just for final clarification yes, we evolved from monkeys.

[JonFromMinnesota]

Sorry not buying unscientific mumbo jumbo full of assumptions and unprovable assertions.

You can repeat that all you want. It won't make the overwhelming mountains of evidence go away.

Go back far enough and something did change into something it wasn't. And science,has never been able to recreate or observe the phenomenon. Utter nonsense.

Evolution doesn't take place in individuals, it takes place in populations. Something doesn't suddenly change into something else. There have been Nobel prize winning experiments in the lab and in nature demonstrating evolution is an irrefutable fact. It has undergone every vigorous test someone could think up. It passes every single time with flying colors.

 

[loveofourlord]

All pure supposition that it ties to evolution since we can't go back and observe any of it actually meaning anything. So what if chimps and us have the ervs. Big deal. Unless you can go back in time and observe things changing into other things it means nothing other than an interesting oddity. That points to common design.

actually I will use the example richard dawkins used in one of his books on evolution.

Imagine the ancestors of the rabbit going all the way back to the last common ancestor with leopards and then up to leopards, the further back you go slowly over time they look different, but if you were to just compare the last 5-20-30 or so generations they look pretty much the same, as each one is small to no changes, but look over hundreds or thousands of generations you will see the changes. At no point does anything become something else, you don't get the common ancestor of a rabbit and leopard suddenly becoming both, you get them slowly changing from one thing to another over such slow steps you need to look over many generations to even notice a change.

 

[Aldebaran]

There have been Nobel prize winning experiments in the lab and in nature demonstrating evolution is an irrefutable fact. It has undergone every vigorous test someone could think up. It passes every single time with flying colors.

Just as global warming has been demonstrated numerous times using computer models that don't even take into account such basic things as water vapor or solar cycles. Then those computer models are used as a means of "scientifically proving" a pet theory to tell us why we should radically change how we live, and how much we should pay in taxes.

 

[ScottA]

I will go with what god has revealed, if your understanding of the bible contradicts reality perhaps it's your understanding that is wrong, evolution is a fact, I won't corrupt reality and the truth to keep a untennable belief, I know god's real and I know evolution happened so I must accept them, I won't make the bible, or reality conform to some preconcieved idea of what is true just to keep holding on to a false belief. Creationism is killing Chrstianity with it's lies and falsehoods, and not sure I want to stand before god and have to explain why I turned people from Christianity rather then accept the truth.

There is no contradiction.

Evolution is not a fact, any more than time is. But that is obviously the world you are living in - that which is of the world...is of the world. John 8:23

I am not of the world.

 

[loveofourlord]

There is no contradiction.

Evolution is not a fact, any more than time is. But that is obviously the world you are living in - that which is of the world...is of the world. John 8:23

I am not of the world.

well time doesn't exist, but we have what we call time, evolution is a fact, we can observe it, we can see how it happened, anyone with a modicum of understanding knows how it go to us, I find it incredible that god used such a simpe process to get such incredible things, it's beautiful.

 

[loveofourlord]

Just as global warming has been demonstrated numerous times using computer models that don't even take into account such basic things as water vapor or solar cycles. Then those computer models are used as a means of "scientifically proving" a pet theory to tell us why we should radically change how we live, and how much we should pay in taxes.

*laughs* your right, no studies or experiments take that into account....except all the ones that do, I love how armchair scientists always think they figured something out science some how missed, they calculated all those things, they don't account for what we see.

 

[ScottA]

well time doesn't exist, but we have what we call time

Quotable. Hilarious. Need I say more?

 

[loveofourlord]

Quotable. Hilarious. Need I say more?

time doesn't exist beyond being a abstract concept, what we call time is movement, but there isn't anything outside of a abstract concept, we percieve time because we acumilate memories giving the illusion of time, but all it is, is the matter in our brains creating memories.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Just as global warming has been demonstrated numerous times using computer models that don't even take into account such basic things as water vapor or solar cycles. Then those computer models are used as a means of "scientifically proving" a pet theory to tell us why we should radically change how we live, and how much we should pay in taxes.

I'm not sure why you're trying to go off topic. If you want to start a climate change denial thread, feel free to do so.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

I love how armchair scientists always think they figured something out science some how missed, they calculated all those things, they don't account for what we see.

They always seem to retreat when sfs joins the discussion.

 

[USincognito]

Just as global warming has been demonstrated numerous times using computer models that don't even take into account such basic things as water vapor or solar cycles.

Oh really? Where did you get that "fact"? And before you answer, are you aware that the last three solar cycles have been some of the weakest ever observed? Despite that fact the earth is getting warmer. Did you know that?

Then those computer models are used as a means of "scientifically proving" a pet theory to tell us why we should radically change how we live, and how much we should pay in taxes.

"It's going to cost us money" does not change the facts or the science any more than "I don't want to be related to apes" affects the facts and science supporting evolution.

 

[USincognito]

I'm not sure why you're trying to go off topic. If you want to start a climate change denial thread, feel free to do so.

It's the MO of political conservatives. Everything ties back to politics for them.

 

[ScottA]

time doesn't exist beyond being a abstract concept, what we call time is movement, but there isn't anything outside of a abstract concept, we percieve time because we acumilate memories giving the illusion of time, but all it is, is the matter in our brains creating memories.

And...where in that [illusion] explanation do you find room for any [actual] evolution?

 

[sfs]

Same test you use for evolution. Common design fits the test.

Note the complete absence of any concrete, well, anything here. Also the complete failure to deal with the challenge that you've been given: name the tests that common design passes. What does it predict? I told you a couple of things (out of a multitude) that common descent predicts, and I noticed that you ignored them. If common design and common descent are equally good explanations, why can I make specific predictions about data, while all you can do is repeat "sounds like common design to me" over and over?

 

[sfs]

Sorry not buying unscientific mumbo jumbo full of assumptions and unprovable assertions.

I am constantly impressed at the gall of creationists who know next to nothing about science, yet feel fully qualified to tell scientists that what they do isn't science. Is there even a flicker of recognition in there somewhere that what they're saying makes no sense? It would be like me telling an NBA player that what he does for a living isn't really basketball. It's hard to think of a response other than, "Huh?"

 

[Aldebaran]

Oh really? Where did you get that "fact"? And before you answer, are you aware that the last three solar cycles have been some of the weakest ever observed? Despite that fact the earth is getting warmer. Did you know that?

You are playing quite loosely with the word "facts" here. It is actually not a fact that earth is getting warmer at all. http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783

"It's going to cost us money" does not change the facts or the science any more than "I don't want to be related to apes" affects the facts and science supporting evolution.

I never made that claim, despite your strawman argument.

 

[Aldebaran]

It's the MO of political conservatives. Everything ties back to politics for them.

Just as liberalism, hatred of anything with basis and value, along with claims of victimhood are the M.O. of the Left.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

You are playing quite loosely with the word "facts" here. It is actually not a fact that earth is getting warmer at all. http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783

Did you really just link an "Anti-West" conspiracy theory site? This is a site that believe in chem trails, that fluoride is mind control poison and that 9/11 was an inside job. Care to cite peer reviewed scientific research instead of a site that prides itself on spreading misinformation and conspiracy theory garbage?

 

[USincognito]

Just as liberalism, hatred of anything with basis and value, along with claims of victimhood are the M.O. of the Left.

^^^ Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Rodan6]

I am constantly impressed at the gall of creationists who know next to nothing about science, yet feel fully qualified to tell scientists that what they do isn't science. Is there even a flicker of recognition in there somewhere that what they're saying makes no sense? It would be like me telling an NBA player that what he does for a living isn't really basketball. It's hard to think of a response other than, "Huh?"