Do you believe in evolution?

[1journeyman]

I agree, study it all. "Seek and you will find".
Genetics is a two-edged sword... there are a whole host of diseases associated with tiny genetic flaws. For any successful positive change in genetic material there are probably millions of failures that lead to death of the embryo or young. Like I posted earlier, the math alone of a series of successful changes that would lead to even a tiny change in a species is staggering.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
Have you read the latest article? Look at post #255 and 256...
Yes, the majority of those arguements were being used back in the mid 90's when I was in school, learning creationist biology.
My question for you would be, have you read any of those sources beyond what was picked out for you? I've read the bible, cover to cover several times. I would not rely on someone picking and choosing verses from here and there and trying to string them together to convince me of anything. I hold the same level of reason when it comes to scientific papers. Sure they are boring but if you want to learn you have to spend some time.
Also, just for a side note. Based on my experience I don't put much stock into anything from Moody presses or anything published by Bob Jones University.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
I agree, study it all. "Seek and you will find".
Genetics is a two-edged sword... there are a whole host of diseases associated with tiny genetic flaws. For any successful positive change in genetic material there are probably millions of failures that lead to death of the embryo or young. Like I posted earlier, the math alone of a series of successful changes that would lead to even a tiny change in a species is staggering.
Yes, plenty of bad things happen, and like you said they often end in death before the embryo even developes, many occur when people don't even realize they are pregnant yet. So what does that mean, fatal mutations are... suprise fatal. Then you have the occational benefitual mutation and the mutations that don't really matter. If they get passed down guess what.. the offspring have this mutation. So yes, there has to be a lot of mutations, many are caught and fixed, some are fatal and end themselves, but the ones that survive get passed on.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Yes, plenty of bad things happen, and like you said they often end in death before the embryo even developes, many occur when people don't even realize they are pregnant yet. So what does that mean, fatal mutations are... suprise fatal. Then you have the occational benefitual mutation and the mutations that don't really matter. If they get passed down guess what.. the offspring have this mutation. So yes, there has to be a lot of mutations, many are caught and fixed, some are fatal and end themselves, but the ones that survive get passed on.

What signs of evolution can we point to today. If Darwinism evolution is true, we should be able to see these changes today in animals since it is said to be continuous. Why is there no modern animals that we can look at in the past say 500 years to prove this theory based on our observations. In a day and time where there would be more reasons for animals to adapt and to change due to how drastically our world has changed...why is there no species that we can point to that express evident changes? Why do we still find species that have not changed such as crocodiles and some "prehistoric fish"?
The only changes i've seen our animals that have been crossbread by humans or by species that are very similar such as a cross b/w a zebra and horse.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
What signs of evolution can we point to today. If Darwinism evolution is true, we should be able to see these changes today in animals since it is said to be continuous. Why is there no modern animals that we can look at in the past say 500 years to prove this theory based on our observations. In a day and time where there would be more reasons for animals to adapt and to change due to how drastically our world has changed...why is there no species that we can point to that express evident changes? Why do we still find species that have not changed such as crocodiles and some "prehistoric fish"?
The only changes i've seen our animals that have been crossbread by humans or by species that are very similar such as a cross b/w a zebra and horse.
First, Darwin lived in the 1800's, I think we can cut him some slack for not being perfect, he didn't even know about genes at the time. What he did provide was interesting observations and hypothesis that other people have built on.
Now, to you question about why we don't see any today. We are talking about changes over huge periods of time not day to day or even century to century. If you want to see the changes occur in your lifetime you will want to look at genetics. We see shifts in alleles between populations and shifts over time. Lets see, what else. We can see some saltwater fish and mussels adapting to survive in fresh water. We see changes in the fish living in the great lakes due to changes in the ecosystem. Zebra and Quoaga mussels have cleaned up the water column, increasing light. We can see adaptations in the pigments of several fish species.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Yes, the majority of those arguements were being used back in the mid 90's when I was in school, learning creationist biology.
My question for you would be, have you read any of those sources beyond what was picked out for you? I've read the bible, cover to cover several times. I would not rely on someone picking and choosing verses from here and there and trying to string them together to convince me of anything. I hold the same level of reason when it comes to scientific papers. Sure they are boring but if you want to learn you have to spend some time.
Also, just for a side note. Based on my experience I don't put much stock into anything from Moody presses or anything published by Bob Jones University.
I present you with evidence, and you won't accept it. I really don't think I should waste any more of my time...

 

[geridoc]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
What signs of evolution can we point to today. If Darwinism evolution is true, we should be able to see these changes today in animals since it is said to be continuous. Why is there no modern animals that we can look at in the past say 500 years to prove this theory based on our observations. In a day and time where there would be more reasons for animals to adapt and to change due to how drastically our world has changed...why is there no species that we can point to that express evident changes? Why do we still find species that have not changed such as crocodiles and some "prehistoric fish"?
The only changes i've seen our animals that have been crossbread by humans or by species that are very similar such as a cross b/w a zebra and horse.
Actually, you don't have to look over 500 years to see new species evolve. It has been estimated that over 150 new species of fruit flies have evolved since they were first cultured in laboratories some 50 or so years ago. It is evolution, exactly as Darwin described - environmental conditions selecting against deleterious traits, ultimately producing new species.

 

[clown boy]

But they are still fruit flies, right?

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
I present you with evidence, and you won't accept it. I really don't think I should waste any more of my time...
What evidence? You present me with dated arguements that I have already seen that are based on taking scientific data out of context and only showing what serves the agenda. Half truths and fancy showmanship is what you have presented me.
You have made claims that you have yet to back up. Where is your proof that Homo hablis and Homo erectus are falsehoods? You made that claim, back it up.
It isn't a hard request, back up your claims. I'm listening. I've read your 'textbook' why don't you read mine?

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
But they are still fruit flies, right?
Sure, they are whatever we call them. A species is defined by people, humans.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
First, Darwin lived in the 1800's, I think we can cut him some slack for not being perfect, he didn't even know about genes at the time. What he did provide was interesting observations and hypothesis that other people have built on.
Now, to you question about why we don't see any today. We are talking about changes over huge periods of time not day to day or even century to century. If you want to see the changes occur in your lifetime you will want to look at genetics. We see shifts in alleles between populations and shifts over time. Lets see, what else. We can see some saltwater fish and mussels adapting to survive in fresh water. We see changes in the fish living in the great lakes due to changes in the ecosystem. Zebra and Quoaga mussels have cleaned up the water column, increasing light. We can see adaptations in the pigments of several fish species.
I'm not just talking century to century... what evidence do we really have? what fossil record do we really have? What I'm saying that if things occur over vast periods of time, there should be things that are evident at all times, I get things happened millions of years ago, but its been millions of years since then...so we should have some new species walking around now that didn't exist millions of years ago, ones that happened naturally... all you are refering to is adaptations and this is not the same as evolution. If evolution really does exist, why is it that we are the only species that has power over all things or are able to think how we do? You would think that other intelligent animals would have adapted... say a dolphin for example into a mermaid like being that would be our sea rival... it doesn't add up at all...
Science is our way to explain how things happen... Religion tells us why they happen... the 2 go hand and hand to me... Basically modern science makes assumptions and look for evidence to support it, but if you look at the theory it has mulitple holes in, in which no can find any credible evidence for... so essentially all Evolution is, is a 1/2 Truth at best-

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
I'm not just talking century to century... what evidence do we really have? what fossil record do we really have? What I'm saying that if things occur over vast periods of time, there should be things that are evident at all times, I get things happened millions of years ago, but its been millions of years since then...so we should have some new species walking around now that didn't exist millions of years ago, ones that happened naturally... all you are refering to is adaptations and this is not the same as evolution. If evolution really does exist, why is it that we are the only species that has power over all things or are able to think how we do? You would think that other intelligent animals would have adapted... say a dolphin for example into a mermaid like being that would be our sea rival... it doesn't add up at all...
Science is our way to explain how things happen... Religion tells us why they happen... the 2 go hand and hand to me... Basically modern science makes assumptions and look for evidence to support it, but if you look at the theory it has mulitple holes in, in which no can find any credible evidence for... so essentially all Evolution is, is a 1/2 Truth at best-
So you are asking WHY things happened the way they did? Evolution doesn't answer that, it seeks to answer HOW things happen.
As far as why we don't see new species. First you must understand 'species' is a word made up by us. If two things are similar enough we put them together, if they are different enough we say they are different. What dictates how much 'adaptation' is required to form a new species. Us, humans, what tells us that we are 'more advanced' than other species, Us.
lets not let semantics get in the way of understanding

 

[jerthunter]

Also, I forgot to mention. It would be great to have a day to day fossil record. Unfortunately geology hasn't been nice to fossils so we are left with snap shots and not a day to day linear view.

 

[jovial]

Originally Posted by Ozmar
Very cool. I stand corrected. I now believe in unicorns.

Oh, but wait... a little more research finds some interesting exegesis:
So it looks like the original poster was correct: the english word "unicorn" is indeed used in the KJV of the Bible. I never knew that. Cool!

And according to Apologetics Press (agreeing with the above quote):
And this quote is attributed to none other than Issac Asimov, an intelligent man who doubtlessly knew what he was talking about.
I think that's really cool. I like learning new things.
-Ozmar the Researcher
Welcome back Soto.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
So you are asking WHY things happened the way they did? Evolution doesn't answer that, it seeks to answer HOW things happen.
As far as why we don't see new species. First you must understand 'species' is a word made up by us. If two things are similar enough we put them together, if they are different enough we say they are different. What dictates how much 'adaptation' is required to form a new species. Us, humans, what tells us that we are 'more advanced' than other species, Us.
lets not let semantics get in the way of understanding
well we shouldn't say anything about anything then...right? If the rules and classifications are given by man...is there anything else that can do this?
This is what makes us special.
God says in the Bible that we were to name all the things of the earth. That we are the rulers of the earth and animals. I can believe that variations of animals occur over time, but not new species such as birds and mammals from dinosaurs... And if you believe dinos were killed from an asteroid- how could species continue to evolve from them?

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
well we shouldn't say anything about anything then...right? If the rules and classifications are given by man...is there anything else that can do this?
This is what makes us special.
God says in the Bible that we were to name all the things of the earth. That we are the rulers of the earth and animals. I can believe that variations of animals occur over time, but not new species such as birds and mammals from dinosaurs... And if you believe dinos were killed from an asteroid- how could species continue to evolve from them?
There is nothing wrong with naming things, I am not saying that. I am merely saying that we shouldn't let the way we define a word be a stumbling block for understanding. Things get named, names get changed, it is a work in progress.
As far as animals going extinct. This happens for various reason, a change in enviroment, competition for food, loss of habitat.
Also, I don't recall any animals that are said to have evolved from dinosaurs, sure we say the birds and reptiles are related to dinosaurs but all that is saying is that they shared a common ancestor.

 

[clown boy]

Jerhunter, I really don't have time to go off researching at the moment. Honestly, you really haven't given me any good proof and a reference for evolution. I will, however, endeavor to get more info to you later.

 

[kjr_trig]

I do believe in the new Mitsubishi Evolution Lancer...The Evo X, I think it comes out in January. Estimated at 0-60 in 4.0 seconds, for about $35,000, it will run toe to toe with the Porche 911. Thats my next car!!!

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
Jerhunter, I really don't have time to go off researching at the moment. Honestly, you really haven't given me any good proof and a reference for evolution. I will, however, endeavor to get more info to you later.

Perhaps you misunderstand what I am trying to do. I am not trying to prove that evolution is true. I am not trying to prove anything. I am merely attempting to point people in the direction to find their own information.
If someone says there are no intermediate species I try to offer a possibility, people say they have proof that something I mentioned is a 'falsehood' and I become interested in this proof. People make claims about how stratigraphy works by mentioning biostratigraphy but failing to mention Magnetostratigraphy or Isotope stratigraphy. So I attempt to direct those people's attention to look at a book and learn about these other fields. People claim that genetic material is never gained so I point out the through vectors or normal DNA replication processes that genes get inserted into DNA. I try to direct people's attention to the priniciples of genetics that show how genes can move from unpromoted regions to promoted regions or vice versa.
What I offer is starting points, I don't wish to prove evolution or disprove creation. I just want people to make useful arguements and present useful information instead of just copying what another person told them.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance. "
-Socrates

 

[ozmar]

Originally Posted by Jovial
Welcome back Soto.
Thanks. I think... That's obscure. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Ozmar the Confused.