Evolution Discussion

[Red Devil]

boy, i was right - the theory of evolution *is* a religion; just look at all the believers trying to convert me.

if the theory of evolution is ever conclusively *proven* and becomes law, then i'll accept it. until then, believe what you want to believe.

splitting this subject off...again.

[MrTwosheds]

Your confusing an explanation of a mechanism (evolution) with its Brand name (religion) Religion says "God made" but makes no attempt to say how, evolution explains how it happens but makes no attempt at explaining the why. Accept both and your understanding of the whole is greatly enhanced.
It is only the dudes in golden robes who want people to reject science, so that they can keep you kneeling at their feet.
"God" wrote its word with molecules and cells, not in books.

[GolemJR14]

islamis a relgion, catholism is a religion, buddism is a religion, god and jesus aint a religion. its reality.

"God and Jesus" = Christianity. In America (where I assume you live), the largest form of Christianity is Catholicism (unless you're a Mormon).

God and Jesus = Catholicism.

What you mean when you say "evolution is a religion" is "atheism is a religion", which in a way, it is. The only non-religion is irreligion, or antitheism.

best argue ment over science is " if there is no god then how did earth be created, if you cant recreate it then it cant be real so, so evolutionist brings wacky ideas. now what have scientist done, they havent recreated the big bang cuz it never happened. facts are only facts if can be recreated. ( now coming off topic a little with religion and of course evololtution is a religion)

The difference between science and religion is thus; science adapts to proof.
- If you can prove something in modern scientific theory wrong, the theory changes so it works.
- If you can prove something in modern religious theory wrong, it's not proof and religion is right anyway.

Religion is arrogant and ignorant. I heard someone describe it once as "The belief that nothing so perfect as us could have happened accidentally".

Believe me, if somebody ever proves evolution incorrect then the theory of evolution will disappear completely. I challenge you to here, in this thread, prove science incorrect. Prove a modern scientific theory wrong in a way that can't be countered by another part of scientific theory that you've overlooked. I can practically guarantee that you won't be able to do it.

um no im not catholic or mormon, or jw, non jew. im just a Christian

[GolemJR14]

trust me, it's a religion; just deny it and sit back and watch the believers come out of the woodwork trying to convert you.

Like gravity. You'd have to be nuts to believe in that ****.

islamis a relgion, catholism is a religion, buddism is a religion, god and jesus aint a religion. its reality.

"God and Jesus" = Christianity. In America (where I assume you live), the largest form of Christianity is Catholicism (unless you're a Mormon).

God and Jesus = Catholicism.

What you mean when you say "evolution is a religion" is "atheism is a religion", which in a way, it is. The only non-religion is irreligion, or antitheism.

best argue ment over science is " if there is no god then how did earth be created, if you cant recreate it then it cant be real so, so evolutionist brings wacky ideas. now what have scientist done, they havent recreated the big bang cuz it never happened. facts are only facts if can be recreated. ( now coming off topic a little with religion and of course evololtution is a religion)

The difference between science and religion is thus; science adapts to proof.
- If you can prove something in modern scientific theory wrong, the theory changes so it works.
- If you can prove something in modern religious theory wrong, it's not proof and religion is right anyway.

Religion is arrogant and ignorant. I heard someone describe it once as "The belief that nothing so perfect as us could have happened accidentally".

Believe me, if somebody ever proves evolution incorrect then the theory of evolution will disappear completely. I challenge you to here, in this thread, prove science incorrect. Prove a modern scientific theory wrong in a way that can't be countered by another part of scientific theory that you've overlooked. I can practically guarantee that you won't be able to do it.

^^This.

wrong again as such the bible which i prefer the old king james it has all the proof of christianity and all evidents that things were created from god, if you were to ask god to send you a witness he will, but god does it by his time not yours. but then again you would ofcourse not believe that would happen.

my dad one day went to a wack job church not very strong and everything, he had a sudden erge to cry for some reason and thats where he got saved. when he was driving back he was crying and laughing. now thats the power of jesus! when your heart is willing and open then god will come to you.

[Ded10c]

@Golem: You know the King James bible has been heavily rewritten from the original Hebrew, right? Including the massive swathes Constantine had added/removed? It's pretty much an entire different story.

Show me this evidence.

@RD: There are fossils and existing monotremes to back up the theory. Hell, some triassic creatures lactated.

[Red Devil]

prove it.

[Red Spot]

prove it.

Didnt ½ the topic revolve around how science proves things and how religion doesnt? Perhaps I am wrong and am I the one who missed to read/remember a few posts

[Red Devil]

the point is that you cannot conclusively prove it - you can only point to old rocks and say that that is what it is. the theory of evolution is just guessing and believing what you want to believe. prove it as a law and i'll agree with you. until then, it's merely wishful thinking.

[MrTwosheds]

If the logic process in use denies all evidence contrary to the pre existing belief, the use of logic is entirely compromised. Further use of the logic function is utterly pointless. The argument is invalid, analysis is not taking place and thus will deliver no usable results. Ignorance persists.
Your apparent failure to understand the evolution process is actually a deliberate act of not wanting to know. Stay happy with your old book, written/rewritten by a series of people even less educated than yourself and avoid further education, it may endanger that happiness.

[Ded10c]

Fact: The Echidna and Platypus are both mammalian monotremes. Evidence: they lay eggs.
Fact: Lactation came about long before the mammalian gland. Evidence: fossils combined with genetic tracing. Unfortunately, I left my Cretaceous fossil collection (not Triassic, my mistake) at work.

Other, related:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688910/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/u03457rt3674356k/


There have in fact been examples of evolution in our history. Humans adapted to malaria, we evolved a counter to it. Unfortunately said counter has its own drawbacks and is called sickle-cell anaemia. This is basic biology. Sickle cell anaemia is a genetic disorder that appeared after malaria infections became commonplace, and appears in the tropics (where there is malaira). Call that a coincidence if you want.

In all other mammalian species, the amount of the enzyme responsible for breaking down lactose - lactase - begins to decline after weaning. In humans that's a different story, and lactase persistence came about as a result of our insistence on drinking cow's milk. Those who don't have the mutation responsible are referred to as lactose intolerant and can't take on large amounts of dairy products. Okay, so perhaps that's another coincidence.

East-asian populations have a mutation in their EDAR gene that gives them hair twice as thick as westerners. This gives them better resistance to cold, though the gene also controls teeth, nails, prenatal hair, etc., all of which remain the same.

There's a species of snake called the Three-Toed Skink that is half-way through its evolution between laying eggs and giving birth to live young. Some members of the species are further along the process than others, but scientists have been watching the process for a while and it's slowly headed towards live young. Eggshells are slowly being replaced by thin membranes and placentae. Link. Perhaps you can offer a better idea than evolution.

Here you are berating us in another thread for "not accepting things you can't see, hear, feel or smell" when you're so busily denying evolution in another.

[Red Devil]

sigh, jumping to the conclusion that species turn into other species because they adapt does not prove the theory of evolution - it just proves that species adapt.

[Ded10c]

That *is* evolution. By definition.

[Red Devil]

no, species do not become other species. they remain the same species, just different. try as you might, you won't adapt into a dog.

[Ded10c]

Try as I might? Evolution is not a deliberate act, you twit. It happens through adaptation to environmental stimulus and eventually turns the evolving species into something else. The theory of evolution does not say monkeys turn into humans, that is stupid. It says humans and monkeys evolved from the same starting point, going in different directions.

[MrTwosheds]

Give up AH, he's putting more effort into not knowing than you are into learning.