Global flood?

[Joe_Gloor]

Orogeny:

Evolution is a scientific theory that is supported by a massive amount of evidence from multiple scientific disciplines. It is not a theory because it can’t be proven.

Evolution is a scientific fact. How evolution is occuring is the theory part.

Peace

Tim

Quite right, I get to that later. Keep reading.

 

[Orogeny]

Joe Gloor:

It helps people to feel like they have a firm grasp of reality when someone tells them ‘this is how it is’.

That would be a horrible reason to teach something in science and that is not why evolution is taught. Evolution is one of the best supported scientific theories there is, especially in biology. Science isn’t taught to make someone feel good.

Scientific theorys are generally taught as ‘fact’ until they are disproven by new ‘facts’. But the reality is that there is a great deal of evidence that points to the evolution of species. The part of Darwin’s theory that is on shaky ground is the ‘cause’ of evolutionary changes.

Darwin’s theory (descent with modification) is not on shaky ground. What is your source for this claim?

Peace

Tim

 

[freesoulhope]

It doesnt bother me. but it bothers a whoooooooooooooooole lot of people. You see its all good and well When you allready have faith. Im just looking for a whole in the theory, looking for its weakness, but i have not regected it. It just feels conspiritus and will eventually go astray if dominated by a meterialist agenda.

 

[Joe_Gloor]

Orogeny:

That would be a horrible reason to teach something in science and that is not why evolution is taught. Evolution is one of the best supported scientific theories there is, especially in biology. Science isn’t taught to make someone feel good.
Darwin’s theory (descent with modification) is not on shaky ground. What is your source for this claim?

Peace

Tim

Once again, keep reading.

 

[freesoulhope]

Orogeny:

Evolution is a scientific theory that is supported by a massive amount of evidence from multiple scientific disciplines. It is not a theory because it can’t be proven.

Evolution is a scientific fact. How evolution is occuring is the theory part.

Peace

Tim

Which part of the evolutionary theory do you consider fact? no doubt things change and adapt, But when have we observed either in fossils or in “real” life, a animal change in to another completly different animal over a long period of time. Have you seen a presentation of fossils comming out of the ocean and slowly adapting and changing eventualy becoming a rhino? i doubt it! ha ha haaa ha haaaaa ha , lets hear what you Got to say about that my evolutionary freind. Evolution is only a fact in the minds of those who interpret it as such. Yes evolution does happen on a small scale, but theres nothing to say that those many small changes over millions of years turn in to different creatures or brunch of in to different types of animals. What evidence do we have that a girraff evolved from anything prior to its present form to day? I bet theres nothing but speculation and human interpretation, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan WHy did certain microbes stay the same over all these billions of years? What about the shark .

 

[Orogeny]

Joe Gloor:

A lot of it doesn’t make sense.
Certain biological improvements appear out of nowhere fully developed which can’t have happened with ‘natural selection’.
Read this Darwin, theory in Crisis

With all due respect, you need to read scientific arguments, not evangelical apologetics. That site is just a regurgitation of ID arguments, arguments that have been refuted in the scientific community.

Before you put a whole lot of faith (pun intended ) in that site, you might want to read what they think about us Catholics:
allaboutreligion.org/roman-catholic-church.htm

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

It doesnt bother me. but it bothers a whoooooooooooooooole lot of people. You see its all good and well When you allready have faith. Im just looking for a whole in the theory, looking for its weakness, but i have not regected it. It just feels conspiritus and will eventually go astray if dominated by a meterialist agenda.

This is the wrong venue for that. You need to study science if you want to shoot down a theory like evolution. By study, I mean really study, like many years at a university kind of study.

Non-scientific arguments will have absolutely no effect on evolution (or any other scientific theory).

Peace

Tim

 

[freesoulhope]

Orogeny:

With all due respect, you need to read scientific arguments, not evangelical apologetics. That site is just a regurgitation of ID arguments, arguments that have been refuted in the scientific community.

Before you put a whole lot of faith (pun intended ) in that site, you might want to read what they think about us Catholics:
allaboutreligion.org/roman-catholic-church.htm

Peace

Tim

What they think about us Doesnt mean that there auguments are not sound. They talk alot about human dna and how the infomation deposted and translated within dna cannot be put down to radomness, and actually scientifically puts forward the obviousness of inteligent design with out pointing to any specific religion or supernatural force. Isnt it also apart of the evolutionary teaching and undestanding that evolution is blind and random? doesnt this give you the impresion of a preagenda to explain away God through nature?

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

Which part of the evolutionary theory do you consider fact? no doubt things change and adapt,

If you accept what you wrote to be true, you accept evolution as a fact.

But when have we observed either in fossils or in “real” life, a animal change in to another completly different animal over a long period of time.

Not true at all.
talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Have you seen a presentation of fossils comming out of the ocean and slowly adapting and changing eventualy becoming a rhino? i doubt it! ha ha haaa ha haaaaa ha , lets hear what you Got to say about that my evolutionary freind.

No, in fact, I haven’t seen that cartoon. Regardless, something like that does not count as evidence for or against evolution, now does it.

Yes evolution does happen on a small scale,

See there, you just admitted that evolution is a fact.

but theres nothing to say that those many small changes over millions of years turn in to different creatures or brunch of in to different types of animals.

Wrong again. I suggest you spend some time reading scientific sources rather than fundamentalist sources.

What evidence do we have that a girraff evolved from anything prior to its present form to day?

talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part2c.html

I bet theres nothing but speculation and human interpretation, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

Do you really think that scientists just sit around and make stuff up?

WHy did certain microbes stay the same over all these billions of years?

Could you maybe give a reference to what you are referring to?

What about the shark .

What about sharks?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

What they think about us Doesnt mean that there auguments are not sound.

You are right. The fact that their arguments are not sound is a separate issue.

They talk alot about human dna and how the infomation deposted and translated within dna cannot be put down to radomness, and actually scientifically puts forward the obviousness of inteligent design with out pointing to any specific religion or supernatural force.

No specific religion or supernatural force, eh. Let’s see. It is a fundamentalist protestant site. Maybe they think that the designer is Zeus? Maybe it is a genie? Maybe it is Satan? Hmm. I don’t think so!

Isnt it also apart of the evolutionary teaching and undestanding that evolution is blind and random?

No. this is why you need to read some scientific sites rather than bogus, deceiving fundamentalist sites. Try talkorigins.org/

doesnt this give you the impresion of a preagenda to explain away God through nature?

No, it doesn’t. Being a geologist, I understand that science is a method of describing nature. God isn’t part of science because He is supernatural. In other words, God isn’t constrained by natural law, so He is beyond the ability of science. Doesn’t mean that He does or doesn’t exist. That topic is part of our faith, not our science.

Peace

Tim

 

[freesoulhope]

Thanks for your time. I am going to bed. If evolution is true its a wounderful and effcient way to create different animals rather then creating them one species at a time. Did all land animals come from one organisom?

 

[freesoulhope]

I want to be a scientist, so i can learn about what im missing out on. What cources did you take? And what feilds in science do you find most interesting?

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

Thanks for your time. I am going to bed. If evolution is true its a wounderful and effcient way to create different animals rather then creating them one species at a time. Did all land animals come from one organisom?

All land animals, all plants, all life have a common ancestor.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

I want to be a scientist, so i can learn about what im missing out on. What cources did you take? And what feilds in science do you find most interesting?

I find geology the most interesting which explains why I’m a geologist! I took a bunch of courses in geology, some in chemistry and some in physics.

Peace

Tim

 

[zian]

freesoulhope:

WHy did certain microbes stay the same over all these billions of years? What about the shark .

Why do some species seem not to change over long time periods? Because they are well adapted species!! There is no reason for change to accumulate in the species because there are no factors that would favor certain types of change over an existing population. If the oceans dried up tomorrow, then the sharks would go extinct, because they are only marvelously adapted to life in the sea. (Well, I think bull sharks have been observed upriver in the Mississippi (fresh water), but then if the oceans dried up the rivers wouldn’t be far behind )

 

[freesoulhope]

Orogeny:

All land animals, all plants, all life have a common ancestor.

Peace

Tim

What does that mean? do you mean that all animals all plant life have a common ancestor acording to there kind? or was there just some funny fish that came out of the water and turned in to plants and animals that we see today?

 

[freesoulhope]

zian:

Why do some species seem not to change over long time periods? Because they are well adapted species!! There is no reason for change to accumulate in the species because there are no factors that would favor certain types of change over an existing population. If the oceans dried up tomorrow, then the sharks would go extinct, because they are only marvelously adapted to life in the sea. (Well, I think bull sharks have been observed upriver in the Mississippi (fresh water), but then if the oceans dried up the rivers wouldn’t be far behind )

its not that your anwser here isnt good, but what your suggesting is that, “flesh” wills its self acording to its enviroment and that the dna gives the infomation necceray to adapt, is that what your saying? Scientists like to say mutate, but why would any unconcious mutation favor any particulour enviroment? and why would dna (which is also unconcience) decide to change in an enviroment that it cant sense or feel, understand or see? Do you get what im saying?

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

What does that mean? do you mean that all animals all plant life have a common ancestor acording to there kind? or was there just some funny fish that came out of the water and turned in to plants and animals that we see today?

It means that all life, whether plant or animal, has a common ancestor. The term “kind” is not a scientific term and is meaningless in the discussion of evolution.

Peace

Tim

 

[Ianjo99]

freesoulhope:

its not that your anwser here isnt good, but what your suggesting is that, “flesh” wills its self acording to its enviroment and that the dna gives the infomation necceray to adapt, is that what your saying? Scientists like to say mutate, but why would any unconcious mutation favor any particulour enviroment? and why would dna (which is also unconcience) decide to change in an enviroment that it cant sense or feel, understand or see? Do you get what im saying?

I think I understand, and the answer would be that mutations occur, but only those that give the particular organism a reproductive adavantage would be species-changing. If there is no particular advantage, then that species’ genes would be replicated just as the others.

It doesn’t “decide” to change, the changes happen, and only with a reason (normally environmental change) does that gene get selected for that would make it change the population. Once a species has filled a particular niche, then barring some environmental reason for it to change, it normally doesn’t.

I’m probably wrong, so I hope that a few other evolutionists come to my aid. I would hate for creationists in this thread to argue against something that I said and for it to not be the general scientific consensus.

 

[Orogeny]

freesoulhope:

its not that your anwser here isnt good, but what your suggesting is that, “flesh” wills its self acording to its enviroment and that the dna gives the infomation necceray to adapt, is that what your saying? Scientists like to say mutate, but why would any unconcious mutation favor any particulour enviroment? and why would dna (which is also unconcience) decide to change in an enviroment that it cant sense or feel, understand or see? Do you get what im saying?

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution. The “flesh” doesn’t will itself to do anything. Mutations occur all the time. Some mutations are beneficial to the extent that they allow for a higher rate of reproduction. That is how change occurs. The DNA doesn’t decide to change.

Peace

Tim