• #48
    (Hi ir0nw0lfe, I ended up writing you a message in a different thread; posting it again here so you get the notification.)

    ir0nw0lfe, I enjoy reading and respect your posts on this site. I'm slightly to the left of you on some matters, but still your posts make a lot of sense. I'm really surprised that you are anti-evolution, and even more so that you are suggesting to people that they read internet creationist pseudoscience as a source of argument against real science. I posted a link to all articles on evolution in the main evolution thread. Here it is again; 317,000 peer-reviewed articles, have a quick skim: ...

    Evolutionary biology is central to understanding medical genetics and the human genome. Every respectable university has molecular biologists, biochemists, ecologists, geneticists, etc. Governments give large amounts of funding to biological and biomedical science. That's hundreds of thousands of people spread over many countries and many decades: all of their lives' work would be meaningless deluded nonsense if evolution weren't true. You don't really think that do you?

    How can you say that the evidence for evolution is lacking? I'm sure you are capable of seeing how ridiculous it is for a couple of men in an internet comment thread to casually say something that invalidates a major strand of western intellectual history.
  • #75
    "My issue with evolution is that I don't buy the argument the man evolved from apes."

    "Evolution is a tool to assist is survival of species not changing one into another."

    There are some people who accept much of evolution, but don't accept that man evolved from apes. But it sounds like you reject all of evolution except for change within species. That's a very extreme form of evolution-denial. You seem to be saying that a wolf and a fox and a goldfish were all created separately, and that the similarities between the wolf and the fox are not the result of the wolf being related to the fox. That seems crazy to me, and I'd like to try to convince you that it is incorrect.

    Do you accept the accuracy of geological dating techniques? So when geologists say "this rock is 400 million years old", do you believe them?(E.g. geologists working in the oil industry, or paleontologists; the science is the same.)

    If so then one of the clearest ways to see that species have changed into one another is the way fossils are arranged in rocks of different ages. 500 million years ago, the only vertebrates are fish. Then 350 million years ago there are fish with limbs / amphibians. Later there are land reptiles, and then later there are mammals. What I just said doesn't depend on believing in evolution, I'm just giving the facts about what types of fossils are found in what age rocks. So if you don't agree with anything I just said then please stop right here and say so.

    My question for you is: under your model of independent creation of species, why do the species appear in the fossil record in this sequence which is 100% consistent with the theory that the mammals evolved from reptiles, and the reptiles from amphibians, and amphibians from fish. Did the creator that you propose deliberately make them appear in this sequence?

    Have to keep this to a sane length, but the other thing I'd mention is our DNA. You can line up a human genome next to a chimp genome and a dog genome and a fish genome, and they show the pattern of similarity you'd expect: chimp and human most similar, then dog, then fish. Again, why is this hierarchical pattern of similarity present in our genomes?

    "Did you read LaserWhites post in some of the threads. He did a much better job than I did explaining the flawed methodology in evolution theory."

    No, really, he just pointed to a couple of anecdotes about hoaxes in the mid 20th century. That's OK for a conversation over a beer in a bar, but it is absurdly inadequate when you are trying, in public, to say that the entire world's educational establishments are wrong! Please, you can definitely try to argue that evolution did not happen, but you can't do it casually! It's not a small thing you are saying!

    There have been some recent books published by prominent evolutionary biologists trying to put forward the evidence for evolution in a clear way. Either of these would be a good read:
  • #78
    Oops, sorry, I didn't see LaserWhite's long post and I mistakenly thought you were referring to his short posts. I'll read his long one.
  • #33
    No evolution should be stoped all together. It is just one big lie. We did not evolve from monkies. We are human. Humans evolved yes. Monkeys are still monkeys now aren't they. They haven't evolved at all now have they. Us humans, have gotten smatter, produced more things in this world. Monkeys, have they done any of this. Nope, most certainly not. Monkeys are still monkeys. Homosapians and Monkeys can not mate and produce a child for they are from two different speicies. Just cant happen. Helle poeple,wake up and smell the roses. Oh wait, we evolved from them too right. Please, get over yourselves. We did not evolve from monkeys and it is because of this evil teaching that our children seem to think they from animals and act like one. Get rid of evolution all together. It is a major danger. Our nation is falling and falling fast, Jesus isnt too happy with this world. If all Christains were to get together in this nation and take a stand and take back what was once a nation based on Christianity, we all be back to normal. But what is stopping that from happening hugh? well, it is because everyone is too busy arguing who is wrong and right over the bible and the verses. Dang, that bible isn't perfect. But Jesus is the only one perfect. Get over yourselves and open your eyes people. we are all in a world of danger if this evolution kick keeps up.
  • #34
    The ONLY evolution that has ever happened is micro evolution (minor changes). There is NO credible evidence for macro evolution (one kind of animal evolving into another). And you're right, monkeys are STILL monkeys, and were STILL humans. If "macro" evolution is true, then why aren't monkeys still changing? Did nature just decide to get happy where it is and stop evolving?? Haha. Anyways. People will continue to believe it, and the main reason for it is because they're afraid if they have to admit there is a God then there might be someone over them telling them what to do. And oh no, they wouldn't want that. It is a satan led belief. If there really wasn't a God then why do they try SO HARD to prove He doesn't exist? Cuz satan is the driving force behind them and they don't even realize it. And yup, they sure are in a world of trouble. Remember, JESUS said "if you hurt one of my little ones, it would be better for you if a mill stone were placed around your neck and you be cast into the sea", and those that are spreading evolution are hurting those who believe in JESUS, so WOE BE TO THEM!!!!
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #44
    I love your enthusiasm. I really do. However, I would like you to learn more about evolution before you speak. Thank you.
  • #97
    What many people seem to misunderstand is that the evidence for evolution isn't just in the fossil record. It is also found in DNA code, anatomical homology, and embryology just to name a few.
  • #53
    There will always be people who won't accept the facts, even when evolution has been proven again and again. Yes, evolution should continue to be taught in science class. Creationism should be taught in religion or philosophy class.
  • #42
    Here are the results of searching for the term "evolution" in the US government-maintained search tool of the scientific literature:

    It returns 316,890 hits: more than 300 thousand separate published papers in recognized scientific journals. People are not working in this field and being funded by governments to work in this field because it is just an idea. This is mainstream science and it has been for years.

    If you think that evolution is just a controversial "theory", then you are not just confused about the natural world, but you are confused about the society you live in -- to a first approximation, all educated people in western societies understand that evolution occurred.
  • #54
    Did you read LaserWhites post in some of the threads. He did a much better job than I did explaining the flawed methodology in evolution theory. Thanks for the links. I will go through them. I have the same problem that LaserWhite has in that the data for evolution has huge gaps. Now let's be clear. I believe changes that occur within a species as it adapts to environmental factors. No problem there. My issue with evolution is that I don't buy the argument the man evolved from apes. This is looking at one piece of the puzzle and saying its the whole picture. Creationism to me is simply acknowledging intelligent design. There are some who take every word in the Bible as literal. I dont think that's accurate and the more research I've done trying to invalidate portions of scripture gave only shown me that the historical references to places and events can be verified as accurate. I believe God created Man and the planet. Evolution is a tool to assist is survival of species not changing one into another.
  • #18
    there has never; not for one second, been an argument about this in my mind. no matter what the evolutionists, or the creationists say i'll continue to believe in creation.

    now, i really hope that there aren't any of those silly people who believe that the flintstones were real and actually had a pet dinosaur (or that the earth is somewhere between 5 and 6 thousand years old) standing around gleefully rubbing their hands together because this antiquated gnostic-christian pastor has finally come to his senses because it also doesn't mean that i have stopped believing in evolution. sound confusing? it's really not, simply because of the fact that both creation and evolution can exist side by side... evolution is nothing more than continued creation. after all, if this world is the creation of an all powerful god, then why can't (s)he effect changes when (s)he wants to?

    (or that an all knowing god come up with something like the ornitorrinco for no other reason than to goof with darwin's mind?)
  • #17
    The debates been over for a long time as it pertains to those intelligent enough to understand the science that already backs up evolution. What leakey means is that the layout of physical evidence now available makes it irrifutable to all but the absolute thickest believers in magic. According to religion the earth is only, what, 7000yrs old? We have documented history that proves beyond a shadow of ANY POSSIBLE doubt that man has been here longer than that, and I'm sorry, I believe what I see with my own 2 eyes more than I believe some story of magic told by people who only want control, not just of my actions, but my deepest thoughts and beliefs. Denying evolution is like denying your own endocrine system exists.
  • #16
    Isnt it amazing how mere man can try every way in his febel mind to discredit GOD? When GOD made the earth and heavens with HIS big boom and when HE created everything like HE wantes it to be, why cant mankind see it took HIM billions and billions of OUR YEARS but only a wink of HIS eye.
  • #100
    All powerful that can do all sorts of crazy creation stuff, but makes humans with genetic deficiencies which lead to all sorts of illness and disease. Oh, that's right. He gave us free will and we created the diseases of the world. So if he's all knowing he knew this would occur. Why create us if he KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN! Sounds like he enjoys punishing his creations. If I was a God in the sky and could create intelligent beings I would make them genetically impervious to all diseases and let them live however they please. It seems pretty vain to make your creations worship you and threaten death and torture if they disobey. I wouldn't care what they did, I'm a freaking god for god's sake!! why bother myself with the mortals and their stupid problems. Oh, that's right. GODS DON'T EXIST!!!
  • #101
    Face it!!!!! God made mankind perfect. Mankind screwed themselves up. Dont blame GOD for our ignorance! We have 'free will' which means taht we can kill ourselves or poison ourselves or destroy the world if we as a civilization so deem it. FREE WILL means just that. We have control over our bodies while we are in the flesh. Why would GOD want to make robots that just do as He designed us to do? It wouldnt be real if He did. Face it! GOD in the one and only GOD Always was and always will be. Choose to dwell in Heaven with Him or not. It's YOUR choice.. I know the truth, It is up to you to find it.
  • #10
    Leakey has been lying the entire course of his miserable life; Remember Pitldown Man? that was suppose to shut down the debate also...... the piltdown man was in the news for 40 years as the long lost missing link. 50 phd dissertations were written. 2 generations of students were i indoctrinated, the 1953 edition of encyclopedia britannic covered 23 pages, the London Illustrated news had a front page cover..... only to find out 40 years later it was all a fraud. a hoax. all the worlds scientist couldnt prove it a fraud, because they were seeing what they wanted to see..... ideology. not science.
  • #60
    First of all, Richard Leakey was born long after Piltdown was "discovered" and his father (Louis) thought there was something off about parts of that skull and tried to figure out who created the hoax before and after it was demonstrated to be faked. Some say, Louis might even have written a whole book about who did, but did not publish it. It could be stressed that he was instrumental in planting the idea of the missing link, which he continued to look for evidence of his whole life....
    Neither Leakey supported Piltdown, neither lied.
    Piltdown was created in the days when most science was a hobby.
    I don't have all the answers either but the biblical timeline has always been troubling to my mind. "Man" is most definitely way more than 20,000 years old.

    I like that there are people who have not been "indoctrinated" (as you put it) also -- your inquiring and skeptical minds are always refreshing to see, even if I don't agree with you. Question authority.

  • #62
    Lets not forget this one either:
    America proclaimed its own fossil man, when a single molar was found in Nebraska. The Nebraska Ape-Man was discovered in 1922 by Harold Cook in the Pliocene deposits of Nebraska. Though it was only a single tooth, Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn, head of the prestigious American Museum of Natural History in New York City, declared it to be man's early ancestor. Officially called Hesperopithecus, Nebraska Man was an immediate hit, complete with a two-page spread in the Illustrated London News.
    From a single tooth was drawn a whole family. The naked ape-man, sporting his club, was flanked by his naked wife gathering roots for supper. Behind them were a herd of camels and a herd of horses, whose fossils had been found in the same deposit, but were extinct in that location long ago.
    The imaginative newspaper coverage and the timing of the find made a big impression at the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial. Nebraska man was never introduced into the trial, since the lead paleoanthropologist Dr. Fay Cooper Cole had some misgivings about it, but it was "there" nonetheless.
    To the embarrassment of many scientist the tooth was later discovered to belong to an extinct species of pig........It was shortly after the Scopes Monkey Trial that some more fossil bones of the owner of that tooth were found, and it was not human after all. Rather, an extinct variety of pig had been on display. To make matters worse, in 1972 the pig variety was found still alive in Paraguay.
  • #63
    I never said Leakey was linked with piltdown man, simply that he, like other evolutionist, see what they want to see when it comes to supposed missing links.
  • #74
    So sure, there have been some silly hoaxes and some silly mistakes, especially by the gentlemen scientists of the early 20th century. The thing about the "missing link", is that it's just something that journalists like to talk about. If you accept evolution, you'll know that the chimpanzee is the closest living relative of humans. There are many fossils of apes that lie on the lineage between the human-chimp common ancestor, and modern humans.

    If you don't believe in evolution, you are contradicting what has been the overwhelming consensus among educated people for a century. If you are going to do something so intellectually radical, at least do it with some gravitas. You can't just point to an anecdote about a silly hoax or error 80 yrs ago, or something you heard said in a religious context, and calmly say: "See? The entire world's educational institutions are wrong." It may be that you know other people who say they don't believe in evolution. I think it will help you to see the mistake you and they are making, by first seeing things in perspective and appreciating the enormity of that claim.
  • R Load more replies

  • #12
    I believe in science; but not evolution. Evolution is historical science (which is extremely affected by bias) and is not experimental science (which is science that can be proven).
  • #5
    I think your argument is a bunch of BS, as it has been explained numerous and numerous times. We did not evolve from monkeys, but from a common ancestor. Do actual research before making yourself look bad.
  • #9
    LN, the argument maybe wrong but the thought is still right. If we took all the fossil discoveries up till the present and made each one a page in a book where each page represented even a century it would look like you were reading a dictionary with a word or two under every letter and thinking you now knew the whole language. There's still not enough scientific evidence to prove evolution without theorizing the gaps. And yes, many gods have been worshipped throughout history, but there is only one God. But that's an entirely separate belief and not my place to make that choice for you.
  • R Load more replies

  • #98
    Of course not. Faith knows no reason. It is quite the opposite. Faith is wishful thinking mixed with social conditioning on a global level. No amount of science will make the masses fear the unknown any less.
  • #96
    The debate won't end. We have overwhelming proof of evolution now but the debate continues. As long as we have conmen and fraudsters like Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, Kent Hovind and their ilk making money by retarding science and lying to their gullible followers, and creationists continually pushing their beliefs as science in schools, and this pushing being accepted by foolish schoolboards, then the debate will, unfortunately, continue.

    You can see the sheer level of ignorance by many of the comments about this very topic
  • #93
    To repeat a quote I heard on the subject, you can't reason someone out of an idea that they didn't reason themselves into.
  • #89
    Mankind will be burdened with religion for a long time to come, his love of fairy stories is much too strong
    While he has religion, he has hope, he doesn't want to face reality.
  • #94
    the greatest fairy tale of the decade: Scum turning into 75 trillion cell human beings. Frogs turning into a prince without the kiss. Dinosaurs turning into birds. Half-ape, half-men walking around grunting, whales with legs that walked around on earth before they decided to go back into the oceans. cant beat those stories.

    As long as "mankind" has evolution, they dont have to worry about judgement day or what happens to their soul when they die. but by then, its toooooo late.
  • #69
    No. Unfortunately, some (note: some) creationists are so certain of their theological perspectives that they can rationalize away any evidence by claiming that "God planted the evidence to test the faithful."
  • #61
    Of course evolution should be taught in public schools... Without it one can barely understand biology and bio chemistry
  • #73
    Not true, remove evolution and science stands up all by itself. Evolution is not a true science, its more of a philosophy or a religion to atheist.
  • #86
    why did you call him ignorant? only you evolutionist can get away with personal attacks, apparently.
  • R Load more comments...