Prowler was born with huge genitalia!!

[2dimes]

It was easily the size of many grown man's.

[edocsil]

No offense, but you really haven't looked to deeply into evolution if you are still asking these questions.


Start here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

[2dimes]

Wiki? That's the bible for evolutionist then?

I probably should have left the tree DNA question out.

[Timminz]

lol.

"A good place to start" =/= ""the bible"

You definitely won't find all the answers there, but you will find links to other sites that do have answers.

[PLAYER57832]

I'm wondering a couple of things that can't really be answered so obviously by most athiest standards that makes the theory of evolution a fairy tale, correct?

Not even sure I understand this, but evolution is actually several things.
First, "evolution" can mean gradual change over time. It happens and not just in biology. Ideas, for example, can be said to evolve. Evolution is actually best thought of as a set of smaller theories that fit into one "whole". The "whole" is mostly all that young earth creationists deal with, and even that not all that well. The overall idea is that species change over time and become other species. One species can diversify and, in a very, very long time, become multiple species.

Within that overriding theory are several pieces, but not all are equally firm. For example, most people would speak of a "single creation". That is, one cell begetting many others that eventually, over millions of years, became the diversity we see, including us. However, this is "just" an idea. We have some evidence that points in that direction, but more and more scientists are saying that maybe there were actually multiple such events. Maybe it wasn't just one protein in the "primordial soup" that became one cell, but maybe that happend several times. Maybe the exact same process happened many times and maybe there were actually more than one protein type or cell type from the very beginning. Ironically enough, it is probably Christians who most hold to the "single cell" theory, because it seems to tie in most closely with Genesis. However, the truth is that, as I said, all of that is really at the level of "ideas that may very well be true, but which we cannot prove or even show more than some evidence to support it". Either the multiple cell, the single cell or even (not terribly well accepted, I just mention it becuase it could be ) "alien" contamination could have created life here originally.

Evolutionary theory, though does not begin there. Evolutionary theory begins with modern observation. Granted, Darwin, with his "origin of the Species" book (and note that if you were recently given a book by an evangelical group, it was a highly edited version that omits a great deal of the proof and discussion that the original version contained) is given credit for popularizing/publicizing the idea that the diversity of what we see came from natural selection and variation. We know know a lot, lot, lot more. We know how mutations work (the mechanics, not why exactly), we have found many ,many, many more fossils than he knew, etc. If you are truly interested, I did get into a lot of that with Lionz most recently. Widowmakers earlier thread also contained a lot, but it is pretty long and got sidetracked on several occasions. There are also a couple specific threads in the Real U. (another CC forum).

If we all evolved from the same origional thing why are humans so vastly superior? Seriously, does anyone even think it's close.

We are not close, not really. Even our "closest" relative, the apes (from whom we did not descend, but who have a common ancestor with us way, way, waaaay back), is only a very, very, very distant relative. In fact, the recent discovery of Anthropithicus (sp? -- I will check it later, but if I forget..). indicates we are even more distantly related than previously believed. That is, the route to humanity began much, much further back than was thought for a long time. The mechanism for our evolution is also in question. At any rate, human evolution IS somewhat unique (not entirely in this) in that we are the sole survivors of many "humanoid" species that have existed throughout time. Neanderthals, for example died off, perhaps because they could not complete with more modern human-type species.

Now, we absolutely differ in our intelligence and so forth. We differ by many, many magnitudes. Just looking at the progression of diverse human culture has always made me thing the original estimates for human evolution were wrong. (they were). Its now pretty well accepted that our differentiation to think as we do began much, much, much earlier than we thought before.

See, this is one of the things that gets frustrating when talking to young earth creationists. You often start by statements that are similar to "well, we all know the sky is yellow, so..." Well, no, we don't all know the sky is yellow.. that is the point! If you think that humanity is only 6000 years old, then the kind of evolution of which we speak could not occur, no. But, add in millions and billions of years and yes, it can...well, the evidence shows that it did.

From a Christian perspective, I add a couple of other points. First, the sheer divirsity and complexity of cultures mentioned seem to have developed over a much longer time than young earth creationists suggest. Personally, I think estimates of complex civilization "beginning" 10,000 or so years ago are flat wrong. I should say, have thought that from the first time I heard of "clovis first" (for North American settlement), etc.

Second, I find it interesting that so few Jews now believe the Earth is young, yet they very much do read the exact text. In fact, there are a good many true Hebrew scholars among them. Yet, it is the Christians who say the Earth is young.

Second, why does a change take so long if I can go from two cells to a fully developed mammel in around 9 months?

Again, I am not really sure what you are asking.

The DNA that decides who a human will be is set more or less at conception (there are changes that occur after, but I am being simplistic).

For a species to evolve, several things have to happen. First, there has to be some kind of mutation. Now, that mutation might give the creature and advantage, which is pretty rare when conditions are steady, it might do basically nothing (some estimates say the majority of mutations "do nothing") or it might be detrimental. These mutations happen more or less all the time. In a "normal" state of events. That is, the climate, etc are all basically the same, the changes will be pretty slow and relatively minor. Change is mostly "accidental" (from a scientific perspective, which absolutely could include God, but science just doesn't get into that part). Maybe you start with a species that is predominantly red skinned, but with a few yello-skinned individuals. Then a volcanoe erupts and all but the few yellow-skinned individual survive. Some of those might have the DNA for the red skin, if its a recessive trait OR that traight might entirely disappear. Over milleania, it would only take a few such changes to create what is effectively a different species.

OK, you say, but that is only micro-evolution. Well.. no. Again, that term "micro-evolution" is a term created by creationists when they realized their original position (and it WAS the original position!) that there was no change was just proven too unbelievable to pass muster at all. Anyway, compound those micro-evolution changes, take a few changes each thousand years, (tiny changes, mind you!) and, you will wind up with significant changes. Now that happens. HOWEVER, and this is important, that is a very, very, very slow process.

For big changes to happen, there has to be big turmoil on Earth. Big climate changes, etc, etc. The fossil record shows long period of relatively little change, followed by very distinct breaks, after which we see many new species. Note that some of the "older" species will still remain. Horseshoe crabs, for example are basically the same creature as when they first appeared back over 400 million years ago. Anyway, one of the most well known events was the "die-off" of the dinosaur. Now, there is some debate over why this happened, but the mechanism doesn't actually matter for discussion of evolution. (it would be nice to know, can tell us other things, but for evolution all that really matters it that huge numbers of species died off)
Some dinosaurs actually did survive this cataclysm. Some (maybe all???) eventually became birds. Along with them was a tiny little mammal.

So, how did that one (might have been more than one, even then, I am just being simplistic) mammal evolve into species as diverse as bears and humans? Again, let me clarify that I am not going back and detailing the phylogeny here. It could be that bears and humans actually diverged before this. However, again, the rough outline of what then happened is the point I am getting to.

Anyway, something really, really big happened that kills off most species. The Earth, obviously is a pretty hostile place. Or, at least, it is a changed place from before. Harsh conditions mean survival is hard. A lot of what might have survived initially perhaps don't survive all that long. But, some do. Some just barely "get by". These harsh conditions may actually "force" an increase in mutations (this is theory, not proven, it is known to happen under some conditions in modern times, so the idea is it might have happened back then, too). At any rate, for those that can survive, there are likely fewer predators and a lot of space. So, they spread out. Just by spreading out, you begin to see differentiation in the population by pure "chance" (again, you can insert "God's plan with no difficulty). Add in that the conditions are likely still pretty harsh and that a lot of progeny die and, well, you wind up with a "speeded up" evolutionary process.

Ironically, we are in just such a period right now. We ARE in a period of huge species die-offs, more than has ever occured on Earth previous, according to some. Along with this, some biologists are noting changes that seem to indicate evolution is happening right now. Even so, by human terms, the process and the observed changes are very, very slow. In geolgogic terms, however, they are occuring quite quickly.

We spent a month and a half in Australia, New Zealand and Egypt when my wife was pregnant and our son was born very dark. We being mostly scottish with some Irish, brit, norwiegian, german and polish ancestory are nice and pasty. As a newly formed person he has slight traits due to the enviroment his mother lived in while he was being developed.

Unless you are either referring to extremely superficial traits, like being tanned or things to do with diet, etc. OR your wife were exposed to some harsh chemicals/ radiation (or extreme heat, your son did not develop any genetic changes due to your environment. Extreme heat can cause fetal abnormalities, but I don't think you are referring to that type of change, either. Instead, what you likely really see is that your son differs slightly from either you or your known relatives, perhaps do to recessive genes or other factors. I am not a geneticists, but I can say that much.

Even though Africans, Mongolians and Oceanic people changed physically due to location they are still humans in every way arn't they?

Evolution does not say that they changed "due to their location" precisely, not in the way you seem to think happened, but read the above and if you still don't understand, I (or someone else) can explain better, in more detail.

How would the mechanism that retards evolution occur and why?

I really don't understand this question.

I would think if my kid needed webbed feet it could have developed them while his foot developed. I know dyno newbolic acid is holding him back. Do trees have that stuff?

Again, this type of question makes it really, really apparent that you don't understand much of biology, genetics, chemistry or evolution. I don't mean to be insulting, but there is no way to put that more nicely without plain lying.

God has direction. Evolution does not. Darwin initially thought that natural selection explained a lot of evolution (but even he was confounded by the time frame, other factors which were later discovered). We now know that while natural selection does happen, a better analysis is not "survival of the fittest", but "survival of the pure lucky". I am not a geneticist, so what I understand of mutations is pretty slim (though what I have said is true). However, there are a lot of factors other than natural selection involved. If anything, the more we learn of evolution, the more it becomes clear to some of us that God almost "had" to be involved. However, that is a belief, not something scientifically proveable.

[Juan_Bottom]

So long as player is going to quash any & every qualm about evolution, I'm just gonna threadjack behind her every post with cool evolution links.

Scientists uncover transfer of genetic material between blood sucking insect and mammals

(This is what she is talking about when she says that evolution is many things.)


All in all though, I think you have to be intelligent to really get what evolution is. I used to think that anyone could understand it, but thanks to the internet I'm convinced that it takes a really smart person.

[Frigidus]

If we all evolved from the same origional thing why are humans so vastly superior? Seriously, does anyone even think it's close.

Although player pretty much covered the post, I do have one issue that hasn't been mentioned. How are humans, on a genetic level, superior? The ultimate "drive" of evolution is the reproduction of genes. There are plenty of species that outnumber us in number and sheer amount of genes. So, while we might value our intelligence highly, we are hardly superior on an evolutionary scale.

[jay_a2j]

Another question they can't answer is how does an animal with 20 chromosomes acquire 26 over time? Or vise versa? But never mind the astounding amount of "faith" it requires to believe in evolution... just take their word!

[Frigidus]

Another question they can't answer is how does an animal with 20 chromosomes acquire 26 over time? Or vise versa? But never mind the astounding amount of "faith" it requires to believe in evolution... just take their word!

As always (and I'm sure you'll listen this time, seeker of knowledge that you are!), I cite the mule. Mules are the infertile offspring of a male donkey and a female horse. Horses have 64 chromosomes, while donkeys have 62. Mules have 63. A mule is the last connection remaining between the two diverging species, which now have different levels of chromosomes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule

[Lionz]

Player,

1. There might not be anyone who's meaning to argue that creatures have not brought forth variety, but how many seperate family trees are there if similarities among creatures can be used as evidence for a common designer and famous evolutionists have suggested that the fossil record did not back up Darwinian theory?

2. Neanderthal is a word that has to do with nephilim or 100 plus year old postflood humans or both maybe. Has a so called neanderthal bone been found anywhere outside a few hundred miles from Mt. Ararat or Europe? The brow ridge never stops growing unless it's the brow ridge of a dead body and we should expect there to be skulls with protruding brow ridges if there were postflood humans who lived for hundreds of years perhaps.





3. There's evidence that clearly suggests humans and dinosaurs have coexisted and we should be careful about making adamant statements about the past maybe. What do we know?

Thoughts on this?

http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/history/history.htm

Or thoughts on this?

















































































































































There are images above with words that are not my own depending on definition at least and I will try to provide source information for stuff at request perhaps.

[jay_a2j]

Another question they can't answer is how does an animal with 20 chromosomes acquire 26 over time? Or vise versa? But never mind the astounding amount of "faith" it requires to believe in evolution... just take their word!

As always (and I'm sure you'll listen this time, seeker of knowledge that you are!), I cite the mule. Mules are the infertile offspring of a male donkey and a female horse. Horses have 64 chromosomes, while donkeys have 62. Mules have 63. A mule is the last connection remaining between the two diverging species, which now have different levels of chromosomes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule

In other words, a gorilla must have reproduced with a mouse to get a human. In order for the math to work out.

[Lionz]

Also Player, how does a single cell theory tie in most closely with Genesis if one does somehow?

[Timminz]

Another question they can't answer is how does an animal with 20 chromosomes acquire 26 over time? Or vise versa? But never mind the astounding amount of "faith" it requires to believe in evolution... just take their word!

As always (and I'm sure you'll listen this time, seeker of knowledge that you are!), I cite the mule. Mules are the infertile offspring of a male donkey and a female horse. Horses have 64 chromosomes, while donkeys have 62. Mules have 63. A mule is the last connection remaining between the two diverging species, which now have different levels of chromosomes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule

In other words, a gorilla must have reproduced with a mouse to get a human. In order for the math to work out.

Exactly.

I don't understand why people keep saying you're a moron.

[jay_a2j]

I don't understand why people keep saying you're a moron.

Chromosome envy.

[Timminz]

I don't understand why people keep saying you're a moron.

Chromosome envy.

See. That's not totally retarded, at all.

[Lionz]

Have two creatures with a certain number of chromosomes ever produced offspring with more chromosomes than either? Maybe I'm far from a chromosome expert and I'm serious asking out of curiosity. Horses and mules and donkeys and zebras are in a kind family together and share common ancestry maybe. It might be that there's an original created eques pair with 64 chromosomes each who now have ancestors that are the products of chromosome loss.

[The Bison King]

We spent a month and a half in Australia, New Zealand and Egypt when my wife was pregnant and our son was born very dark. We being mostly scottish with some Irish, brit, norwiegian, german and polish ancestory are nice and pasty. As a newly formed person he has slight traits due to the enviroment his mother lived in while he was being developed.

There is a simple scientific explanation for this effect. Your wife had sex with a black man.


Also if you don't to buy into a "scientific explanation" like evolution for the questions that have plagued man for eons you might find this more your speed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-agl0pOQfs

Fucking Magnets, how do they work???????

[2dimes]

You figure that people having sex with multiple partners causes their eventual offspring to have traits of all of them? Oh.

Second, why does a change take so long if I can go from two cells to a fully developed mammel in around 9 months?

Again, I am not really sure what you are asking.

Uh, do you believe in baby mammels?

I'm not very smart so I don't know how it works and maybe I've just flat out been lied to but I have two children. I have read and heard theories that my single cell sperm joined with a single cell egg to make them happen.

In aproximately 9 months the babies that came tearing out of my wife's vagina had more cells. Like a really lot more!! They had things like eye balls, feet and internal organs. While I can't prove any of this to you, I have to, by a certain amount of faith, believe they went from being two cells to a fully developed mammel in around 9 months.

Yet even though my son is on his way to darker pigment skin and tight curly hair. It will take an unknown long time and many generations before people related to me make the transition to being Maori or upper egyptian.

So we can develop into a functioning thing during a relatively short gestation but it takes an extreamly long time to evolve noticably. Seems counter productive. We should get to work and evolve quicker.

[PLAYER57832]

If we all evolved from the same origional thing why are humans so vastly superior? Seriously, does anyone even think it's close.

Although player pretty much covered the post, I do have one issue that hasn't been mentioned. How are humans, on a genetic level, superior? The ultimate "drive" of evolution is the reproduction of genes. There are plenty of species that outnumber us in number and sheer amount of genes. So, while we might value our intelligence highly, we are hardly superior on an evolutionary scale.

I did not address this because I believe humans are superior because I believe we were specially designed by God. I do believe God used evolution in this process, but else agree with 2dimes. Plues we are the only creature fully able to change our environment to suit ourselves.

[The Bison King]

Uh, do you believe in baby mammels?

I'm not very smart so I don't know how it works and maybe I've just flat out been lied to but I have two children. I have read and heard theories that my single cell sperm joined with a single cell egg to make them happen.

In aproximately 9 months the babies that came tearing out of my wife's vagina had more cells. Like a really lot more!! They had things like eye balls, feet and internal organs. While I can't prove any of this to you, I have to, by a certain amount of faith, believe they went from being two cells to a fully developed mammel in around 9 months.

Yet even though my son is on his way to darker pigment skin and tight curly hair. It will take an unknown long time and many generations before people related to me make the transition to being Maori or upper egyptian.

So we can develop into a functioning thing during a relatively short gestation but it takes an extreamly long time to evolve noticably. Seems counter productive. We should get to work and evolve quicker.

Absolutely none of this has anything to do with evolution. A baby can be formed in 9 months because there is already a DNA plan for it to go off of. That DNA plan is what takes a hundreds of years to change. A single child being born is a completely different concept that creating an entirely new species. Also its MAMMAL NOT MAMMEL.

Yet even though my son is on his way to darker pigment skin and tight curly hair.

Seriously you're wife had sex with a black man. 1 black man 1 time maybe more.

You figure that people having sex with multiple partners causes their eventual offspring to have traits of all of them? Oh.

No absolutely not, his black sperm mixed with your wife's white egg 1 time. This made a black baby. It has nothing to do with eventual offspring and it has nothing to do with evolution what so ever.

[2dimes]

You're right. I'm going to beat them to death. PIctures and possibly video of them dead later! Thanks for being my friend man. I love you.

[The Bison King]

No problem I do what I can

[Juan_Bottom]

EDIT- Player

Yet even though my son is on his way to darker pigment skin and tight curly hair. It will take an unknown long time and many generations before people related to me make the transition to being Maori or upper egyptian.

Genes can be passive and take long breaks before appearing again. His darker skin could be a trait of a family member of yours who actually did live in ancient Egypt.

So we can develop into a functioning thing during a relatively short gestation but it takes an extreamly long time to evolve noticably. Seems counter productive. We should get to work and evolve quicker.

Depends on what you mean by Evolve. Evolving positively in a massive scale probably takes a long time. But you definitely notice the blips in the process like cancer or hereditary diseases like the one I am afflicted with. Some animals though have done it really quickly:
http://scienceblogs.com/zooillogix/2008 ... lution.php

[2dimes]

She's not home yet but I noticed something when I was hitting the boy with a pan moderatly hard. He's not a black kid at all and has the same lips, ears and several other features of my Dad. My Dad must be his dad. Darn, sorry about the beating bro.

[Juan_Bottom]

Also, the Magnets comment, once again, did make me laugh.