If I can just jump in here for a minute. It is INCREDIBLY unlikely for the remains of an animal to become fossilized. The conditions have to be just right. Yet, it does happen, and there are enough fossils that have been found to see the process of evolution. EVERY fossil is a transitional species. Creationists live in the gaps. If a fossil is found that bridges that gap, the creationist will scoff and say "now there are TWO gaps!"
?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms
by Guest with Questions 125 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Warlock
It's obvious that you can't answer my questions, Warlock.
It's obvious why you can't answer my questions. If you did, you'd have to abandon your emotionally derived beliefs. You can't bring yourself to take the first step, much like a dyed-in-the-wool JW can rarely bring himself to take the first step of questioning his belief in JW leaders.
AlanF
Alan,
Why don't you go fly a kite in a thunderstorm.
Warlock
-
AlanF
Warlock said:
: Why don't you go fly a kite in a thunderstorm.
You've completely proved my point. LOL!
AlanF
-
Warlock
: Why don't you go fly a kite in a thunderstorm.
You've completely proved my point. LOL!
AlanF
And you can't see the points YOU have made. LOL.
Warlock
-
Little Drummer Boy
If I can just jump in here for a minute. It is INCREDIBLY unlikely for the remains of an animal to become fossilized. The conditions have to be just right. Yet, it does happen, and there are enough fossils that have been found to see the process of evolution. EVERY fossil is a transitional species.
I'm glad you posted that. That is getting at what I was trying to say in my last post.
-
Warlock
Warlock:
Please don't take this as an insult, but you believe in ghosts, which we can't see, but you won't believe in evolution because you can't observe a bird morph into another species in your lifetime? Please explain the discrepancy.
never,
I am NOT insulted by your question, at all.
I have had some paranormal experiences.
Others HAVE seen things, including some people I know.
If you Google "ghosts" you will see over 25 million entries. There are more people that have "seen" ghosts, than have seen a bird, or a man, or whatever "morph" into another species.
Are all these people lying?
Warlock
-
neverendingjourney
I've read through several of these threads, and this is the form they all seem to take, depending on whether the believer or non-believer started the thread:
Creationist: Evolution is just a theory.
Evolutionist: Yes, but there is proof to back it up.
C: No there's not
E: Presents proof.
C: That's not good enough.
E: Presents more proof.
[Insults are exchanged]
C: I didn't come from monkeys. That's stupid. It only makes sense that there is a God.
E: A lot of things in life don't make sense. Science isn't intuitive.
C: Whatever, you're not going to stop me from believing in God.
E: Nobody is trying to tell you to stop believing in God, but we don't want you misrepresenting science.
C: Go f*$k yourself
E: Right back at you.
And the cycle repeats itself a few days later.
-
neverendingjourney
There are more people that have "seen" ghosts, than have seen a bird, or a man, or whatever "morph" into another species.
Are all these people lying?
Were the ancient Greeks lying when thousands of them claimed to have interacted with gods and demigods? Yes. Was I lying when I would make up ghost and demon stories as a child to fit in with my dub family? Yes. Just because thousands of people claim to have paranormal experience doesn't mean they are real. My parents have claimed to have had paranormal experiences countless times, and when I finally shook off the JW superstitions, I was able to come up with a logical, valid explanation for each and every one of them. Sometimes things happened that I could not provide an immediate explanation for, but eventually the truth came out. Never once has anyone anywhere on the planet ever proven or shown evidence for ghosts and the paranormal. Not once. I prefer to believe in things for which there is evidence, like evolution, for instance.
As for the second part of your statement, you again show that the efforts of every person posting on here in defense of science are in vain. It's been explained countless times to you that species don't morph into other species over the lifespan of a human being. These things take thousands and thousands of years. The reason we know this is the case is because of the fossil record, not because of eyewitness testimony. Distorting evolutionary science the way you do is what infuriates many posters and leads them to hurl insults at you.
-
SixofNine
"Are all these people lying?"
I'll take the fossil record and scientific evidence over people any day. Humans lie; it's part of being human. Some of the humans in any internet discussion of evolution are lying to themselves that they've done enough research on biology to have a credible voice in the discussion. After all, who wants to think that their thoughts aren't credible? Bluster is easy, research is hard. A little bluster, a little self dishonesty, a childish demand that others respect your opinion, and voilà! your voice is just as important as a brilliant lifelong researcher of biology/evolution. The incredible unyielding arrogance of the average Joe.
Koko the gorilla was once asked "who broke your toy?", she answered by signing the name of her kitten, along with a declarative "...broke it", when Koko had been observed/filmed breaking the toy.
-
RAF
RAF wrote:
:: What would you take as proof?
: No questions left aside
You'll never have proof of anything, then.
But equally, you'll never have proof of a creator.
Right ... not my intention - questionning and sharing is enough (people do what they want with it)
: The thing is why should I stop questioning when there is still no proof - I mean why should I buy the whole thing?
You shouldn't. However, weight of evidence is the key to at least provisional acceptance of any idea, including what are generally accepted as scientific facts. As paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote:
"Generally accepted" is not a proof ... (the earth was flat - was generally accepted)
In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent."
"Confirmed to such a degree" doesn't mean that something else couldn't be confirmed to the same or higher degree if only known or taken into consideration - the perversion is then to think that only one thing already known have such degree
: Why do you buy the whole thing for instance?
Weight of positive evidence. And the great deal of evidence that makes no sense in terms of a super-intelligent creator.
"Positive evidence" (is subjective related to the whole thing) such as your idea of super intelligent creator (we don't have to see God the same way)
: Do you think that we are a Chimp descendant?
No. I think that mankind and chimps are descendants of a common apelike ancestor that lived 7-8 million years ago. But I'm open to revision, since new data can come along at any time.
ok ... it works for me (but on its basis only genetically talking - means that it could have taken place in a very different way and for different reasons)
: Why an Ape more than a PIG?
Body structure, behavior and genetics. Body structure is obvious. Chimps, gorillas and orangutans display some behaviors remarkably like humans, far more so than pigs. Genetically, modern apes and man have DNA that's at least 95% the same, whereas pig DNA is a good deal more different (you can find more information on this with as much effort as I can).
Genetically it can be a lurre ... Not a good example but it gives you the an idea ... someone can look like me more than any of my sister but we still don't have the same parent ... if you believe in evolution whatever we come from would have gain almost the same behaviour regarding to the same environement and needs very quickly (survival instinct and intelligence - related)
: When you only have to crumble the genomes to get a human being (not sure I'm clear here but I think you get what I mean).
I have no idea what you mean.
http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/Discover/discover37.cfm
: And the real question is why would anyone really want to force me (or anyone) to believe the whole thing ...
Is anyone forcing you to believe anything? Now, in a cult like the JWs, enforcement of belief is de rigeur. But not in normal human endeavors.
not in normal human endeavors I agree (are we in a kind of kindom hall here?) to have people forcing there truth on others and calling (people) names/weak - unfaithfull ?
: What does it change in other people lives? Is it not enough to give an opinion and let people make their own opinion? I love to debate but really most of the time it turns into name calling which are not arguments but some kind of intimidation and influence on weak minds I don't want to get into this game but it happens that I really feel like but then it wouldn't satisfy me to win or to lose this way since most of the time there is nothing to lose or win in this anyway.
Debate about important topics tends to generate heated discussion. My personal observation is that the majority of people who don't accept solid scientific notions like evolution is that they have few facts or good arguments to back them up, and so they quickly resort to name-calling when backed into a corner, or they run away from discussion, which frustrates those willing to debate, or they even threaten other debaters with destruction from God. Most often, it's only after those things occur that more scientifically inclined people return the favor.
Yeah ... LOL ... I wonder if this will change a bit ... it doesn't look like (but been there, done that, and might do it again ... I am a human being after all - but not proud when I do ... Oh well ... I've find a solution which helps - coming here only on my good days - or ignoring what I don't feel concerned about / or when the other side is flip/flopping asking me to acknolegde something when they don't want to aknolegde what doesn't allow me to care about an argument already made and taken into consideration ...
It happens that I feel concerned (I've been an ass more than once even without realising it at first) also I've been a dummy more than once too ... (I have to realise it) ... if so it means that I have to admit something ... I just do ... it's easier than denying, I want to go forward and that's not loosing ... So it's not as if I don't want to understand ... I do .... (but no real proof means that I don't have to agree and that something else can be).
Eddited to add : I have nothing to proove, but everything to share, to question and to learn