Dubla, put simply. The fact that evolution occurs means that those who believe it does not occur are incorrect. For some people, the belief that evolution does not occur is a deeply-held religious conviction. That it occurs invalidates such a belief.
funkyderek
JoinedPosts by funkyderek
-
56
Don't believe in Evolution or Creation.
by sleepy in.
what am i going to do , i'm not fully convinced by evolution or creation arguments.. they are both flawed in different ways, and suffer from a lack of evidence.although change through evolution does happen how far this can go is unknown.complexity from design does happen but usually leaves evidence .also no theories can go far enought in answering the ultimate questions.evolution relies on a universe that springs into existance, creation on a god that does so.evolution requires many complex and unlikely senarios in order to have happened so does creation.the fossil record is incomplete and without the missing pieces we can only infer what else should be there.god is either very shy or has lost his voice and dosen't seem bothered to prove his existance.. yet i exist, and the very heart of my being , the conscious mind is one of the least understood phenomenons in the universe.
-
-
-
56
Don't believe in Evolution or Creation.
by sleepy in.
what am i going to do , i'm not fully convinced by evolution or creation arguments.. they are both flawed in different ways, and suffer from a lack of evidence.although change through evolution does happen how far this can go is unknown.complexity from design does happen but usually leaves evidence .also no theories can go far enought in answering the ultimate questions.evolution relies on a universe that springs into existance, creation on a god that does so.evolution requires many complex and unlikely senarios in order to have happened so does creation.the fossil record is incomplete and without the missing pieces we can only infer what else should be there.god is either very shy or has lost his voice and dosen't seem bothered to prove his existance.. yet i exist, and the very heart of my being , the conscious mind is one of the least understood phenomenons in the universe.
-
-
funkyderek
"evolution", the definition you just gave for it ("change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations"), does not invalidate god or creation.
I never said it did, but evolution as it has occurred over many millions of years with speciation does invalidate the claims of certain fundamentalists regarding direct creation 6000 years ago.
-
56
Don't believe in Evolution or Creation.
by sleepy in.
what am i going to do , i'm not fully convinced by evolution or creation arguments.. they are both flawed in different ways, and suffer from a lack of evidence.although change through evolution does happen how far this can go is unknown.complexity from design does happen but usually leaves evidence .also no theories can go far enought in answering the ultimate questions.evolution relies on a universe that springs into existance, creation on a god that does so.evolution requires many complex and unlikely senarios in order to have happened so does creation.the fossil record is incomplete and without the missing pieces we can only infer what else should be there.god is either very shy or has lost his voice and dosen't seem bothered to prove his existance.. yet i exist, and the very heart of my being , the conscious mind is one of the least understood phenomenons in the universe.
-
-
funkyderek
no ones deeply-held religious beliefs are invalidated by evolution
Yes they are. JWs and a host of other fundamentalists believe that God directly created each species separately approximately 6000 years ago and that species barriers are immutable. The fact of evolution proves that this is not the case, thereby proving that the deeply-held religious beliefs of those fundamentalists are invalid.
-
56
Don't believe in Evolution or Creation.
by sleepy in.
what am i going to do , i'm not fully convinced by evolution or creation arguments.. they are both flawed in different ways, and suffer from a lack of evidence.although change through evolution does happen how far this can go is unknown.complexity from design does happen but usually leaves evidence .also no theories can go far enought in answering the ultimate questions.evolution relies on a universe that springs into existance, creation on a god that does so.evolution requires many complex and unlikely senarios in order to have happened so does creation.the fossil record is incomplete and without the missing pieces we can only infer what else should be there.god is either very shy or has lost his voice and dosen't seem bothered to prove his existance.. yet i exist, and the very heart of my being , the conscious mind is one of the least understood phenomenons in the universe.
-
-
funkyderek
the origin of life has not been proven, in any way shape or form
Evolution is not about the origin of life. The origin of life from non-life is called abiogenesis. Evolution is "change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations" and is proven to occur.
-
20
Mental illness forget the statistics count who you
by rekless insatistics can be flexed to represent anything you want.. personally i know of out of a congregation of 89 .
my daughter & son in law who is an elder, three elders wives , publishers 4. another daughter that refused to accept the witness life style.
my wife just before she died had to be on prozac.
-
-
funkyderek
So just everybody just count and you will be closed to reality than many surveys.
No you won't. Firstly, you haven't provided an operational definition of mental illness. Secondly, you have no way of verifying the information you receive, and thirdly, the results will necessarily be skewed as those who knew no JWs with mental illness are unlikely to reply.
-
5
Common Parent
by gravedancer ini was driving home today and i had a thought (a totally new experience i admit).
i think i can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:.
assumptions and logic chainthe population of humans is growingthe population of humans has gorwn over timewe could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth ratefrom that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the start of mankind.
-
-
funkyderek
How could someone else have preceded her as Mitochondrial Eve? Where would the current title holder have obtained her MDNA from?
Mitochondrial Eve is the most recent ancestor in the purely female line. She is not the only one. (Her mother, grandmother etc.) At the time she was alive, she was obviously not an ancestor of everyone living, one of her female ancestors would have held the title. She got her MDNA from her mother, same as the rest of us. Remember, the title of "Mitochondrial Eve" is a retrospective one. There must be a most recent common matrilineal ancestor of everyone alive, who it is depends on who is alive at the time.
I have studied the theory but still have some issues making sense of it.
It's a difficult one, and the name Eve probably only adds to the confusion, as do press reports that the idea of Mitochondrial Eve is somehow startling or in itself newsworthy. That such a person existed is a certainty. The only question is where and when.
Here's a useful web site on the subject:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/mitoeve.html
and believe it or not:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4055.asp also provides a very good explanation although, unsurprisingly, questions the accepted dates.
-
13
Bethelites - did they read the Bible in a year?
by jack2 inas many of you know, bethelites are "required" to read the entire bible within a year when they serve there.
my question, to any who served there or who may know any who did, is: did they really read the entire bible in year's time?
frankly, i wonder how this "requirement" could be met, seeing how long the scheduled work hours are plus the other things that are expected of them.
-
-
funkyderek
I read it in six months. It's not that long, just boring.
-
5
Common Parent
by gravedancer ini was driving home today and i had a thought (a totally new experience i admit).
i think i can reconcile some of the answers to the thought but for some discussion here it is:.
assumptions and logic chainthe population of humans is growingthe population of humans has gorwn over timewe could study history and create a growth curve over time to extrapolate a consistent growth ratefrom that we could take the current human population of the planet and work backwards to the start of mankind.
-
-
funkyderek
This points to a glut in human genetics at which point the earthly population was so tiny that the genetics of one woman could affect all future population. She must have had genetic advantages which enabled her offspring to survive while all other offspring from other parents died over time thus leaving her MDNA as the consistent fabric across time.
No gravedancer, that's not the case. She was not the only female of her time to have surviving offspring; she was the most recent female ancestor of everyone alive today in a purely matrilineal line. That such a person must have existed is mathematically provable, but that in itself tells us nothing about when she existed or how many humans were alive at that time.
The differences in MDNA in the population tell us that she lived between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, most probably in Africa at which time she would not have stood out in any way from the population. At the time, a different long-dead person would have carried the title of "Mitochondrial Eve."
Most of the confusion lies in the moniker given this woman. She was not the only woman alive at the time, or in any significant way different from her contemporaries, except in retrospect. She was certainly not the wife of "Y-chromosome Adam", our common ancestor in a purely patrilineal line, who appears to have lived many tens of thousands of years later.
-
114
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
by JanH inscientific american runs an article rebutting some of the most common creationist arguments.
short and to the point.. this is the first page.
click for the following ones.. see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleid=000d4fec-7d5b-1d07-8e49809ec588eedf&catid=2.
-
-
funkyderek
My idea of 'species' is intrinsically based upon extremely distinct lifeforms, so a new 'species' to me would be the product of, say, a cat and a dog as they are significantly dissimilar. This means that convincing evidence of 'speciation', to me, would have to be on that level.
So you'd only accept hybridisation as proof of speciation, if two very different species were able to interbreed? But surely that would prove that they're not different species by your definition?
Grouping animals into different species, genera, families etc. has traditionally been done by reference to their physical form. It is only in recent years that DNA testing can be done to determine the degree of relatedness between different animals. The concept of a "species" is difficult to define exactly, because all species on Earth are related and the designations are necessarily arbitrary. Horses and donkeys, for example, can interbreed but almost always produce sterile offspring. The species barrier is not 100% solid but is "permeable" depending on the degree of separation between the species, proof, surely, of ongoing evolution.
-
56
Don't believe in Evolution or Creation.
by sleepy in.
what am i going to do , i'm not fully convinced by evolution or creation arguments.. they are both flawed in different ways, and suffer from a lack of evidence.although change through evolution does happen how far this can go is unknown.complexity from design does happen but usually leaves evidence .also no theories can go far enought in answering the ultimate questions.evolution relies on a universe that springs into existance, creation on a god that does so.evolution requires many complex and unlikely senarios in order to have happened so does creation.the fossil record is incomplete and without the missing pieces we can only infer what else should be there.god is either very shy or has lost his voice and dosen't seem bothered to prove his existance.. yet i exist, and the very heart of my being , the conscious mind is one of the least understood phenomenons in the universe.
-
-
funkyderek
The point I am making is that God would have explained things to people in a way that they could understand.
But why would they have trouble understanding evolution, if God explained it to them right from the start? Why lie?