Questions about origins of life timeline

[AV1611VET]

Ironically, evolution shows us that we are connected to all life on earth.

Only if you play connect-the-dots.

 

[Dusty Bin]

Only if you play connect-the-dots.

.

 

[Mainframes]

Only if you play connect-the-dots.

Science connects the dots in the correct order and the answer becomes clear.

Religion ignores most of the dots and draws what they want to see.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science connects the dots in the correct order and the answer becomes clear.

Is that why they're rearranged at times? they're so clear?

 

[Armoured]

Only if you play connect-the-dots.

That's what sensible people do. If you want to look at a series of numbered dots and conclude "purple monkey dishwasher" when everyone else gets 1 2 3 4 5, well, good luck to you.

Considering you have well over a million posts in counting threads I'm somewhat bemused you seem to think connecting things in obvious order of sequence is wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

... obvious order of sequence is wrong.

If it's so obvious, why have animals had their classification changed in the past?

 

[Kylie]

To take evolving any further than noticing some changes to life we have seen, one must believe one way or the other. We believe God, or Satan through man and man's wisdom.

Yeah, that's not how science works. Since you don't grasp this, it's safe to say that any and all opinions you have regarding science are just wrong.

So? They can think Santa had an affair with their wife if they like. That doesn't make the little evolving science observes responsible for life on earth!

So you are grasping the fact that a person's beliefs do not actually make a difference to reality.

Such a shame you still have the wrong idea about what science says about evolution...

"Flatworms Are Oldest Living Ancestors To Those Of Us With Right And Left Sides, Researchers Report In Science

: A team of scientists from Spain and the UK has determined that a certain curiously primitive group of flatworms are the oldest living ancestors to all "bilateral" animals.."

Flatworms Are Oldest Living Ancestors To Those Of Us With Right And Left Sides, Researchers Report In Science -- ScienceDaily

Yeah, and does that say Humans evolved from worms? No... Fail, dad.

It says that there was an ancient ancestral species that first evolved a left and right side, and all species we have today that have left and right sides can trace their origins back to it. Flatworms are the oldest such group. But that doesn't mean that flatworms were the ancestral species.

Such a shame, you almost had it...

The hand of God is where we came from, and had life breathed into us by the Almighty Personally.

Please provide testable and verifiable evidence. Until you do this, it's just a thought. And to paraphrase what you said earlier...

So? They can think Santa had an affair with their wife if they like. That doesn't make God responsible for life on earth!

He formed us from a planet He had just made for us to live in, with all the stuff we were to be made of. He then took man to a beautiful garden He had planted and prepared for us! That beats your flatworm or pond fable hands down.

In Star Trek, it says that an ancient race of progenitors seeded countless worlds throughout the galaxy with DNA so humanoid life would thrive, and in this way they ensured that they would leave behind a legacy. They also made sure that their work couldn't be discovered until all the species worked together.

That's an even better story. Does that mean that it's correct?

Or do you now realise that the truth is not determined by which story sounds better?

Your disgusting man from flatworms fable leaves man with no purpose, no destiny, no connection in a real way to the universe and other life on earth.

Your man from dirt fable leaves man in subservience to a god that for some reason needs worship and is apparently insecure enough to get jealous when he doesn't get it...

 

[Dusty Bin]

If it's so obvious, why have animals had their classification changed in the past?

New evidence, more knowledge, the stuff you as a creationist either know nothing about or choose to dismiss.

 

[Armoured]

If it's so obvious, why have animals had their classification changed in the past?

Because further evidence makes the sequence more obvious.

Ever seen how vision improves as a fog lifts?

 

[AV1611VET]

Because further evidence makes the sequence more obvious.

Ever seen how vision improves as a fog lifts?

Then this:

Science connects the dots in the correct order and the answer becomes clear.

... can take a hike.

How do you even know what the correct order is? didn't you assume before you changed it, it was in the correct order?

 

[Armoured]

Then this:

... can take a hike.

How do you even know what the correct order is? didn't you assume before you changed it, it was the correct order?

With the built in assumption that there will be corrections as further evidence comes to light.

You know, like rational people do?

 

[AV1611VET]

You know, like rational people do?

Ya ...

Rational people talk about how clear things are, until a theorational person reminds them they change things around, then they bring up a "fog."

Well, for the record, theorational people admit up front ... and show in writing* ... what rational people try to hide.

* 1 Corinthians 13:12a For now we see through a glass, darkly;

 

[Dusty Bin]

Ya ...

Rational people talk about how clear things are, until a theorational person reminds them they change things around, then they bring up a "fog."

If you tell your wife you will be home by six then later you find you have a meeting at six, did you tell her a lie when you said you would be home by six? or did things change causing you to tell your wife something different?

Circumstances and new information cause revision and change, that's why science doesn't deal in proof.
Unlike religion (which can prove absolutely nothing) science never proves anything.

 

[Armoured]

Ya ...

Rational people talk about how clear things are, until a theorational person reminds them they change things around, then they bring up a "fog."

Well, for the record, theorational people admit up front ... and show in writing* ... what rational people try to hide.

* 1 Corinthians 13:12a For now we see through a glass, darkly;

If you see 5 equidistant dots, what shape would you think of?

 

[justlookinla]

science never proves anything.

Amazing.

 

[Armoured]

Amazing.

Not really. It's a basic understanding of how the scientific method works.

 

[bhsmte]

Not really. It's a basic understanding of how the scientific method works.

Some, just like to be amazed, I guess.

 

[justlookinla]

Not really. It's a basic understanding of how the scientific method works.

Cloak it in whatever terms you wish but to believe something which isn't proven is a faith based belief.

 

[Armoured]

Cloak it in whatever terms you wish but to believe something which isn't proven is a faith based belief.

Not at all. There can be evidence for something, and evidence against something. Neither is "proof", and neither suggests a faith based belief, at least, not the way I understand you to mean the term.

 

[Armoured]

Some, just like to be amazed, I guess.

Or wilfully misunderstand basic elements of a theory who's strawman version they've been told to hate.