However, I spent 10 years in the org. trying to prove that other people's beliefs were wrong and that mine were right.
yep, it can be futile sometimes.
OK, so let's test the science advocates out here.............
by NotaNess 40 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
5go
-
NotaNess
New you guys wouldn't let me down! That was fast, you all are like buzzards hovering over a camel in the desert that's on his last leg.
So I'm still not seeing anything definitive. I see info on various creatures and tons of drawings. I'm not talking about adaptation to environments either.
Show me a significant find where one species is in transition to the next. Didn't know you were gonna drop down the whole internet here...too much to read in a short time.
"Prove God can or can not, heat a burrito so hot that even he can not eat"
Sounds like a line from a song.
Show a picture of God....( see Arthur, "made in our image" ) Arthur I'm a believer of evolution to an extent, and what would we do without science? "Thank Arthur for that" huh?
In all seriousness though, My opinion...God's there, and he put into play all the science and evolution you're arguing over. How else would this world survive without it, anyway.
Much respect to you. "A" for effort guys/gals. Thanks.
-
NotaNess
You know I'm a little new, and haven't tried all the text and image stuff. How do you get the quotes from others in the yellow box in a reply?
Is it the little quotes icon by the smiley?
If you can muster a little love for me, help on that is much appreciated.
And I think the God/Evolution thing should be left for another forum, and not here. It fuels too much emotion. Reading the bickering back and forth is stressful, I'm gonna stay out of those topic threads from now on, it's the same old stuff every time.
-
5go
"Prove God can or can not, heat a burrito so hot that even he can not eat"
Quote from
Homer J Simpson
When he stumped Ned Flanders -
needproof
How do creationists explain the pre-humanoid fossils which have been found in numerous places around the world? Clearly these are not homo-sapien-sapiens, try out the 'Becoming Human' documentary on google.
-
Satanus
5go
Very goo. Now, could you express all of that w your own words and edit it down a bit? You don't actually expect someone to read all of it, do you? Then again, maybe i'm just getting lazy.
S
-
passive suicide
I have a way simpler answer for evolutionary development...ever get a virus?..........they mutate so fast it's not even funny to the point where anti-biotics are not even having an effect on em.....hey here's a side bar question for everyone : Why did almighty Jah create viruses?.They are living organisms.hence they were created right? Don't tell me Satan had anything ta do with it....'cause now your just being silly.
-
cognizant dissident
Virus and bacteria (don't remember the plural) were the first thing that came to my mind to support evolution, also. However, the question stated that the proof must show the evolution from one species to another, so I didn't think this would qualify. It does still prove that evolution happens every second though.
Cog
-
passive suicide
Yeah......We're smart...not like people say! Cheers, and have a good night.:P
-
Abaddon
Notaness
I think I must be a 'science advocate', although the loaded language you employ makes me cringe .
Please give definitive examples that by evolution, a species has changed into something else.
Okay, here you go - and all this involves species alive today, by the way. This material is 1st year evolutionary biology so I am a little surprised you don't know it.
Putting yourself forward (as you are doing) as an informed non-science advocate (loaded language is a two edged sword ) I would think being adequately informed about what science actually does advocate as rather important... unless of course you have learnt about science from non-science advocates, in which your science education lacking rigour, detail or reliability is no surprise. This is nothing personal; we have a revolving door fitted to this forum specifically for Creationists et. al., as we have such a high through-put of the poor dears, and they have unfortunately saddled you with a stereotype based upon their behaviour and knowledge. Sorry if you don't fit the 'profile'; I will be delighted when/if you prove otherwise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species
That gives three examples; the Lesser-Black backed/Herring Gull ring, one concerning Salamanders, and another concerning Warblers.
More on ring species here;
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/irwin.html
... and here;
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VA1BioSpeciesConcept.shtml
This should fulfil your specified standards of evidence; at least two separate scientists, photographic evidence, no hominid skulls. Please be very clear about what reasons you dismiss this evidence for when you reply.
On a this point (hominid skulls), may I ask you how many years study of the biological sciences have lead you to concluded that you and a political-religious lobby group centred in the American mid-West are right, and the rest of science are wrong? You sound very... what were the words you used... 'so sure of' 'your beliefs, I was wondering on what basis you were so sure.
Do you actually believe scientists are that stupid? Or do you credit the 'evolution theory under crisis' bullshit put forth by the Creationist/IDiots lobby? Or is there some seminal paper by a non-science avocado-ate you would like to bring to the discussion and clue us in on why you can dismiss evidence so casually?
Ring species are where an organism has spread geographically, often so two directions of dispersal end up meeting after travelling round a geographical feature in separate directions, or even the entire globe. The original species has been subjected to variation in its geographical spread, to the extent that when it meets itself again it cannot hybridise, being a different species.
Yet if you take examples from locales quite close to each other, they can hybridise.
It's like;
Europe Asia N America Europe
1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
The species started as 1 in Europe, and has spread round the world to Europe from the opposite direction, but has become 20 at that point. A 1 could interbreed with a 4 or 5, a 4 or 5 with a 10, etc., but 1 and 20 cannot interbreed and are two separate species. Ring species show evolutionary transition between species based upon geographical separation, a good illustration of the chronological transition normally causing speciation.
I'm not saying you won't have examples, we just want you to walk the talk. Support your claims. You're so sure of the science and evolution. Now bring it.
"we just want?"? Is that a royal we, have you got MPD , or are you typing for a larger group of people?
I love this kind of discussion so much. Sadly, although the examples I am give are rock-solid, experience tells me that bronze-age allegory advocates tend to move the goalposts. Having typically not been aware that speciation is easily demonstrable, when they find out it is, they will simply carry on believing what they already believed in by changing their standards of disproof rather than examining what they believe in the face of clear evidence they are wrong. I will be truly happy if Notaness proves me wrong.
Notaness, could you answer four questions for me? I've responded to you, I hope you'll return the courtesy.
- Why do you limit the power of Almighty God by insisting a creative myth invented by a bronze-age goatherd is true, and denying that god has the ability to make the world come about as we see it by any variety of methods including evolution? You say you believe in evolution to an extent, but obviously not to the extent of believing in speciation, yet that's like saying you believe in internal combustion to an extent, but don't believe petroleum vapour is flammable. Is it becaue you believe the Bible is literal?
- If the speculation by scientists about extinct forms being related to each other on account of the signs of forms transitioning from one to another in the fossil record is so massively wrong, how come when genetic techniques were developed to study the inter-relatedness of organisms, the 'mistaken' scientific claims regarding the relatedness of extinct forms based on claudistics (study of bones) turned out to be verified by genetics most of the time?
- What role does random mutation play in evolution? This is a trick question, as most often Creationists et. al. are spectacularly wrong in their understanding of it. Please use your own words.
- In the above example of ring species, say the Herring Gull one, please tell me where the transitional species are, and how distinguishable they are from the species they ransform from and too. Answering this may well reveal to you how much rubbish you have been mislead by, as 'there are no transitional species' is such a popular Creationist/IDot rallying cry it is seldom given scrutiny by those using it.
Please realise I am replying to you in the same spirited and confident tone you used yourself. Time for you to walk the talk (origins).
