AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Evolution

779 182526
stormwolf722
offline
stormwolf722
227 posts
Nomad

Well a lot of people have been telling me evolution is real. They give me the most craziest surreal 'facts'. Has anyone discovered any fish with legs? Any humans with gills or fins? If you put all the pieces of a watch into you're pocket and shake it around for trillions of years, will it ever become a watch? Is there but one possibility? Or if you completely dismantle a chicken and a fish, and put it into a box, shaking it around for trillions of years. Will it ever become a fish with wings? or a chicken with fins? :l

  • 779 Replies
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

Calling an atheist close minded? No, we are simply people who have explored religion, read up on evidence and come to the conclusion that religion is but hollow faith.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

For those of you keeping track I've update the "Evolution Bomb" to include the following links. This brings it up to 164 links of information providing evidence for and explaining evolution and debunking creationists.

The Bombardier Beetle Myth Exploded
Tree evolution
Explaining the Cambrian "Explosion" of Animals
Richard Dawkins tackles the Bombardier Beetle
Coelacanth: The Strawman Creationist Argument
The truth about the Discovery Institute
Beating Astronomical Odds

master565
offline
master565
4,104 posts
Nomad

That's unicorn poop. That's why you need to back up your statements.


:O

I've got unicorn dung all over my lawn ;(
I'mma shot one the next time they get near my house.
44Flames
offline
44Flames
585 posts
Nomad

I think MageGrayWolf may have concluded that evolution is true and real. Also it has lots of evidence that it is true.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

It would probably take cold hard evidence that the origin of the universe is the big bang and we all came from a cell that originated from this.


The problem with this is your required evidence has nothing to do with evolution. Not to mention the Big Bang doesn't even have anything to do with the origin of life. What you have put together is nothing but a strawman fallacy.
Your misrepresenting the theory stating the universe expanded from a single point as the origin of life and further misrepresenting the origin of life as what evolution states. As such your creating a false position and attempting to refute that instead of what is actually being said.

Now I would very much appreciate that you either pay attention to what your opponents arguments are or if you are, to please stop breaching the 9th commandment.
44Flames
offline
44Flames
585 posts
Nomad

Here is alittle bit on the Big Bang theory:

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model that explains the early development of the Universe. According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state which expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion caused the young Universe to cool and resulted in its present continuously expanding state. According to the most recent measurements and observations, this original state existed approximately 13.7 billion years ago, which is considered the age of the Universe and the time the Big Bang occurred. After its initial expansion from a singularity, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into various subatomic particles. It would take thousands of years for some of these particles (protons, neutrons, and electrons) to combine and form atoms, the building blocks of matter. The first element produced was hydrogen, along with traces of helium and lithium. Eventually, clouds of hydrogen would coalesce through gravity to form stars, and the heavier elements would be synthesized either within stars or during supernova.

The Souce

I am not an expert on the Big Bang Thoery also I do not know alot about science I am only in grade 10 and not doing science yet for my course. Just here is alittle of what the Big Bang is about.

stephenking
offline
stephenking
2,413 posts
Nomad

perhaps this will be a bit difficult to comprehend for some of you close-minded atheists, but this i believe says it nicely
Tsk tsk. Saw your profile. Nothing but hollow facts. Guess you hate gays, too?
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Nothing but hollow facts.


I wouldn't even call them facts. I think flat out lies works far better.

The Discontinuity Problem
The most basic problem with the theory of evolution is staring us right in the face, but it is so obvious that it is often overlooked.

Indeed, perhaps the most striking fact about nature is that it is discontinuous. When you look at animals and plants, each individual almost always falls into one of many discrete groups.


This one is covered by AronRa's 9th foundational falsehood of creationism.
The 9th falsehood of Creationism: "No transitional species have ever been found." (Video)

This article goes on to make mention of cats.

When we look at a single wild cat, for example, we are immediately able to identify it as either a lion, a cougar, a snow leopard, and so on. All cats do not blur insensibly into one another through a series of feline intermediates.


Interestingly enough AronRa actually has a video on the feliforme.
Foundations of Feliforme Families

Finally this article ends with the argument.

If the theory of evolution were true, then plants and animals really would blur together without clear distinctions. It really is a problem for which Coyne has no good answer.


Well it just so happens we do have life that does just this.
Understanding Algae That Are Both 'Plant' And 'Animal'

The next issue brought up is that of sex.

No Excuse for Sex
The origin of sex is one of the hardest things for evolutionists to explain.


This is again just flat out wrong, as demonstrated here.
The Evolution of Sex

And here at 2:25.
Answering the 15 Questions Pamphlet (Part 3 - Multicellularity, Sex and Fossils)

Further information on the evolution of sex.
EVOLUTION OF SEX
ShinyCowBeast
offline
ShinyCowBeast
120 posts
Nomad

1) Meeting another sentient race with almost the exact same religion as Christianity, just relevant to them.
2) God announcing himself in a way that would leave me without doubt of his existence.
3) Dying and finding out there is an afterlife.


since the first and third will most likely not occur during your lifetime, would you mind expanding on the second option?

Starting at minute 7 of the bottom link on MageGray Wolf's post(feb 2, 7:46pm,):

Step 2. A second sex (M) evolves.


It just evolves? this video dosen't bother to explain how. it says similar things more than just this, but I don't want to be repetetive

Tsk tsk. Saw your profile. Nothing but hollow facts. Guess you hate gays, too?


No, I do not hate gays. I disagree with their actions, but that does not mean I hate them.

Not to mention the Big Bang doesn't even have anything to do with the origin of life


Creationists believe that God created all things. this means that we disagree that the universe was created via the big bang. no big bang= no universe=no evolution, if there were to be no God involved. that is why the big bang is a part of evolution(from our point of view, if not yours)
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

since the first and third will most likely not occur during your lifetime, would you mind expanding on the second option?


The second could be in a few ways.

1) A direct voice in my head, which would give me, at the very least, proof that I am not going crazy, that it is telling the truth, and does not imply it is mortal. That would be the minimum for this way.

2) A mass announcement with subsequent proof/image/simultaneous occurrence/understood by all.

3) A series of events which would be for all intents and purposes impossible for all to occur, each leading me in the direction of belief in a god.

Note: None of these would outright convince me that Christianity's teachings are correct, or any other religion for that matter, (unless -specifically- told that it is)only that there is a supernatural being of some kind.

It just evolves? this video dosen't bother to explain how. it says similar things more than just this, but I don't want to be repetetive


Mage's second link details this pretty well. If you haven't looked at it yet I suggest doing so. If you have, do you have any problems with what it is saying?

Tsk tsk. Saw your profile. Nothing but hollow facts. Guess you hate gays, too?


Enough personal attacks stephenking. It's off topic and unhelpful.

Creationists believe that God created all things. this means that we disagree that the universe was created via the big bang. no big bang= no universe=no evolution, if there were to be no God involved. that is why the big bang is a part of evolution(from our point of view, if not yours)


In the sense of progression, yes. However, the Big Bang theory does not claim that life originated from this event. Life originated after the Big Bang had already occurred, due to natural causes and reactions.

I see what you mean in that you have to have the first floor of a building to have the second, and then the third. HOWEVER, this does not accurately apply. We have overwhelming evidence of evolution, and since the universe exists, we know that it originated somehow. Thus, we are at the equivalent of living on the third floor of said building, but as of yet are unclear exactly of what is on the first and second, but we know that BECAUSE the third floor IS there, then logically the first and second are there as well.

In non analogy, we know evolution is a fact. We know that life must have originated, because it exists now. For life to have originated, there must have been a place for the origination of life to occur, thus the universe must have itself originated. This is logic. Just because we may not be sure -how- 100% any of these happened does not invalidate our current findings on the validity of Evolution, Abiogensis, or the Big Bang Theory.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

Mage's second link details this pretty well. If you haven't looked at it yet I suggest doing so. If you have, do you have any problems with what it is saying?


My bad, I meant, "Mage's last link details this pretty well." etc.

This one

EVOLUTION OF SEX
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Fun fact: bacterias can also have sex. Sort of. Of course most of the time they just divide themselves, but they are able to exchange plasmids, who can contain important genetic material.

EVOLUTION OF SEX

The last point of this site, the parasite inducing a sort of 'arms race' between parasite and their target. I think it's called the Red Queen hypothesis. Didn't it gain quite a few supporters lately?
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

It just evolves? this video dosen't bother to explain how. it says similar things more than just this, but I don't want to be repetetive


All sex is in it's most basic form is the fusion of cells mix their genetic material then separating.
To put it into simple steps for you.

1) We start with cells being able to self replicate without sex.
2) Being able to combine, separate and replicate (earliest sex).
3) Favoring combining and replicating, but being able to do so with any other of the species (hermaphrodites).
4) This process then becomes more specialized over time resulting in at least two genders (male and female), though they can still function as hermaphrodites as they can switch between being male or female if need be.
5) This process becomes even more specialized finally resulting in at least one dedicated male and one dedicated female gender which are unable to change.

no big bang= no universe=no evolution,


The universe is here whether it be the result of what the Big Bang states or some other method. So you first step no Big Bang = no universe is faulty. No Big Bang just tells us we got the start wrong.
macfan1
offline
macfan1
421 posts
Nomad

There are some missing links in evolution. Darwin predicted that as more fossils were found, they would find the missing links. Today so many fossils have been found, and there are still so many missing links. The answer- there are no missing links. It simply doesn't exist.

Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

There are some missing links in evolution. Darwin predicted that as more fossils were found, they would find the missing links. Today so many fossils have been found, and there are still so many missing links.


There are not so many "missing" as you make out. We have far more than enough complete to say evolution is valid.

Out of all the species that have ever existed, the chances that fossils of -all- of them were made and that they were not later destroyed, AND that we will find all, is simply INSANE.

If you expect the fossil record to eventually hold an actual fossil of every species which ever existed on the earth, then you are crazy. Not only is the term, "Species" just a term, as things constantly are changing there is no definite point at when another species is, in fact, another species, if you expect that we will essentially have a fossil of every creature that ever existed, then you are crazy, as that will never happen, NOT because evolution is false, but BECAUSE of how rare it is for fossils to form, the fact that we have to find them, and that they can be naturally destroyed/spread.
Showing 526-540 of 779