Forums → WEPR → Evolutionism or creationism

Considering it's as stupid as saying accepting gravity exists is gravityism. Considering creationism is propagated solely on quote mines, logical fallacies, and flat out lies. As apposed to actual evidence (which I know you don't except so there's no need to go there again). I think the term "creationist idiot" is rather fitting.

I would have to say a fail of the magazine, considering it leads stupid people to conclude reproduction works similarly more or less to cloning.

I pointed out the Nylonase, which you refuse to see as a mutation. I pointed out the lizards, which your arguing over with me. The moths changing color is a result of a mutation activating/deactivating certain genes.

Unlike you, their definitions were evaluated and excepted.

I mean what the hell are you trying to say we should throw out the excepted definition and use yours?

I guess you fail on understanding the basics of peer review.

Considering some believe in a literal 6 day (day=24 hours), some believe it means millions of years= 1 God day. It would seem it can be taken figuratively.

And we've been constantly pointing out that definition is a load of bull*&^%!

Never said humans and bird just suddenly popped up. It was an evolutionary step that allows these forms to eventually exist. Wait, do you think the Cambrian explosion included humans and birds?

It is possible that the descendants of humans and birds once shared a common ancestor.

I'd like you guys to keep in mind the extreme difficulties and complexities of evolutionary theory. Unless someone here is an evolutionary biologist, all we really have are discoveries made and these scientists' interpretation of the data. The random genetic mutation that (presumably) occurred over millions and millions of years is extremely difficult to understand.
Typically in science, we can use experimentation to predict certain outcomes. If I do x, then y should happen. But evolutionary theory, for the most part, is not predictive. It is a descriptive theory of how things got the way they are.
That being said, Darwin did make certain predications about the necessary existence of certain species with specific features. And these predictions turned out to be right (the species simply hadn't been discovered yet).
And I think it's worth recognizing that evolution is an accepted theory among biologists; and at the risk of fallaciously appealing to authority, I really do think this acceptance lends incredible credence to the the theory.
But it really sounds like you guys are getting into something that no one here is equipped to argue for or against. We can go find research done by actual scientists and quote it, but it's hard to critically assess these kinds of studies because they're so involved and require so much background knowledge.
Just... I dunno... keep this in mind throughout your discussion.

There is plenty of propaganda for evolution out their too.

I didn't see it like cloning, per se, but as they shared the same gene pool with the same traits.

Yes, but their very first ideas for their theories were probably not written down or reviewed.

Well definitions have to come from somewhere

and right now your just "blindly accepting," if you will, someone's definition without even questioning it.

Proof. Give me a specific example of the organism that shows the common ancestry between birds and humans. And yes, I just did pull the "Proof, or your statement is wrong" card.

I say it is more likely that we evolved.

I say that we evolved, but something had to start it all right. That's why I am agnostic. Calling it evolutionism is just stupid. You don't call scientific theories "ism"s. I mean common, people seem to begin to think that science is a religion. Only sad part is, science is backed by facts.

I say that we evolved, but something had to start it all right.

That perfectly could be true. I actually have believed that for a long time. But, after years of being an atheist I finally realized that it is impossible for the human mind to find another answer to the universe. For, all the scientific theories can be true(big bang ect.) I now think something had to have created the first chemicals and all that. Which after a very very long time, the theory you said could of happened. But of course there almost has to be thousands of other life forms out there, just by sheer size of the universe.

I read in a book once (can't quite remember the title) that there first were thoughts, these thoughts "evolved" into gasses, which quickly condensed into a liquid, and eventually, creating a vaste mass.

(i don't know what to think about it, on the other side it supports atheism, on the other on it supports creationism)

I now think something had to have created the first chemicals and all that.

But of course there almost has to be thousands of other life forms out there, just by sheer size of the universe.

Well if the lizards have the same gene pool, it's just a matter of which individual lizards have which traits, and eventually, only the ones with the most desirable traits will live. If 2 lizards homozygous for big heads have a baby, the baby will have a big head. And no, the moths didn't go through mutation to achieve their color, because before the Industrial Revolution, there were already rare cases of the exact same moths. Their gene pool stayed exactly the same. No mutations. It was just a matter of natural selection, unless your going to claim that natural selection is a small form of macroevolution.

Yet you try to use that to argue against it?

And no, the moths didn't go through mutation to achieve their color, because before the Industrial Revolution,

I think what there saying is the plan of an organism is not something that was developed but already in place. That's why you think they are developing big heads from evolution, but the fact is big heads were already part of the plan.

It's also sad to see evolutionists have to make hoaxes like the peppered moth and the industrial revolution in order to support their claims.

Im catholic but i belive in a mix of the two that everything was created but not in a second, eveything evolved acoding to a divine plan.

The fossil record, what we know about life and the lack of proof of a deity to me only point to the Theory of Evolution being correct.

Im catholic but i belive in a mix of the two that everything was created but not in a second, eveything evolved acoding to a divine plan.