Conquer Club

One of many problems with Evolution

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Endgame422 on Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:03 pm

universalchiro wrote:Evolution is the biggest threat to Bible, gets mankind away from reading the Bible and its taught in school to children, very dangerous doctrine.

How is this dangerous? Lots of theories and religious viewpoints are taught in schools the world over,including the teaching of your own philosophy here. Seeing your from Texas makes me think your opposed to American schoolchildren being taught evolution as fact, but what of the children in Islamic countries being taught the Quran as fact. How about members of the Christian faith teaching their beliefs as fact? Is your issue with unsubstantiated beliefs being taught as fact or are you simply trying to say that your beliefs are right and everyone else is wrong?
User avatar
Lieutenant Endgame422
 
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:35 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby GoranZ on Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:22 pm

universalchiro wrote:Evolution is the biggest threat to Bible, gets mankind away from reading the Bible and its taught in school to children, very dangerous doctrine.

Biggest threat to the Bible is the bible it self, not the evolution :D

I was born in a system that discouraged religion. But now I live in the same country but religion is favored... Crime, corruption, poverty in the country I was born was many times smaller then in the country I live in now. If religion and bible as part of that religion generates morality then why morality now is non significant part of the morality before the favoritism of religion?
Even a little kid knows whats the name of my country... http://youtu.be/XFxjy7f9RpY

Interested in clans? Check out the Fallen!
Brigadier GoranZ
 
Posts: 2916
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby notyou2 on Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:35 pm

UC your curiosity gets the best of you. Hope you enjoy reading this.
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby notyou2 on Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:37 pm

Endgame422 wrote:
universalchiro wrote:Evolution is the biggest threat to Bible, gets mankind away from reading the Bible and its taught in school to children, very dangerous doctrine.

How is this dangerous? Lots of theories and religious viewpoints are taught in schools the world over,including the teaching of your own philosophy here. Seeing your from Texas makes me think your opposed to American schoolchildren being taught evolution as fact, but what of the children in Islamic countries being taught the Quran as fact. How about members of the Christian faith teaching their beliefs as fact? Is your issue with unsubstantiated beliefs being taught as fact or are you simply trying to say that your beliefs are right and everyone else is wrong?


It's the last one. He's better than us primordial oozes, god made him.


Just don't tell him that Jesus and the lion share a common ancestor.
Image
User avatar
Captain notyou2
 
Posts: 6447
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:09 am
Location: In the here and now

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby AndyDufresne on Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:58 pm

notyou2 wrote:It's the last one. He's better than us primordial oozes, god made him.


Just don't tell him that Jesus and the lion share a common ancestor.


Image


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:02 pm

universalchiro wrote:endgame,
Yes, God formed man out of clay, still not living material, so what God did is He breathed the breath of life into the nostrils of man and he became alive. The Hebrew words for Life and alive are both chay, so the texts reads God breathed into the nostrils the breath of chay and man became chay. So the Bible records that the Breath of Life, Holy Spirit, begot life. Which is Life begot life. And that's why Luke 3:38 records Adam was begot by God. Which is in harmony with Pasteur , yet evolution violates Pasteur that life cannot come from non-living material. The theory of Life begetting life is observed and tested with every birth. The theory of life evolving from non-living material is not observable.

Evolution is the biggest threat to Bible, gets mankind away from reading the Bible and its taught in school to children, very dangerous doctrine.


Endgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:33 pm

universalchiro wrote: There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.


No one thinks that the start of life on the primordial Earth was proteins being formed by random chance, because the proteins would not have been self-replicating. It is only a self-replicating molecule (e.g. RNA, DNA) that could have been the first ancestor of current life on this planet.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby GoranZ on Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:39 pm

universalchiro wrote:
universalchiro wrote:endgame,
Yes, God formed man out of clay, still not living material, so what God did is He breathed the breath of life into the nostrils of man and he became alive. The Hebrew words for Life and alive are both chay, so the texts reads God breathed into the nostrils the breath of chay and man became chay. So the Bible records that the Breath of Life, Holy Spirit, begot life. Which is Life begot life. And that's why Luke 3:38 records Adam was begot by God. Which is in harmony with Pasteur , yet evolution violates Pasteur that life cannot come from non-living material. The theory of Life begetting life is observed and tested with every birth. The theory of life evolving from non-living material is not observable.

Evolution is the biggest threat to Bible, gets mankind away from reading the Bible and its taught in school to children, very dangerous doctrine.


Endgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

If you dont respond to someones post does that mean that you agree with it?

universalchiro wrote:Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

Buahahahahahahahaha... All major religions existing today in most of their lifetime received full support from the countries they exist in, and this applies even now. And you complain about Evolution getting tiny government funds :D After all there not all people are believers so your whining is unreasonable.
Even a little kid knows whats the name of my country... http://youtu.be/XFxjy7f9RpY

Interested in clans? Check out the Fallen!
Brigadier GoranZ
 
Posts: 2916
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:52 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
universalchiro wrote: There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.


No one thinks that the start of life on the primordial Earth was proteins being formed by random chance, because the proteins would not have been self-replicating. It is only a self-replicating molecule (e.g. RNA, DNA) that could have been the first ancestor of current life on this planet.

Awww you missed the point, if the simple protein is impossible, then the more complex DNA or RNA is also impossible.
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:21 pm

universalchiro wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
universalchiro wrote: There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.


No one thinks that the start of life on the primordial Earth was proteins being formed by random chance, because the proteins would not have been self-replicating. It is only a self-replicating molecule (e.g. RNA, DNA) that could have been the first ancestor of current life on this planet.

Awww you missed the point, if the simple protein is impossible, then the more complex DNA or RNA is also impossible.


"More complex" in this context is utterly meaningless. From a physics/chemistry point of view, proteins are much more complex than DNA molecules, which are pretty simple. In terms of sheer size, a typical amino acid has maybe 20 atoms, so your 150-AA protein would contain 3,000 atoms. Meanwhile, in the lab, we've created self-replicating DNA strands that are 200 nucleotides long. Each nucleotide has about 15 atoms, so that DNA strand also has 3,000 atoms.

Now, you might say, well then that also can't form by random chance. But that's because you are using faulty probabilistic reasoning. Let's use an analogy. Suppose I were to flip a coin 1,000 times, and I bet on it landing heads for the first 500 rolls, and tails for the last 500. The chances of that are, of course, (1/2)^1000, or about 1 part in 10^300. After I've completed the rolls, I've almost certainly lost the bet. But then I examine the sequence of rolls, and realize that the chances that this specific sequence would happen are also 1 part in 10^300! Yet you would not say that the sequence of rolls was impossible -- it just happened. This is true of any specific outcome for such a large ensemble. The relevant question in biogenesis is not the odds of one particular 150-link amino acid sequence forming, it's the odds of any 150-link sequence forming. That's all it would take -- then whatever was formed, would live on or die out according to natural selection.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:53 pm

Nope, you don't understand genetic coding. You just told a computer programer, "it doesn't matter that your code is 100,000 characters in a specific order for specific function, nah any order with any characters will do just fine, because then random unguided mutations will evolve the program to Microsoft XP given enough time."
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Metsfanmax on Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:10 pm

universalchiro wrote:You just told a computer programer, "it doesn't matter that your code is 100,000 characters in a specific order for specific function, nah any order with any characters will do just fine, because then random unguided mutations will evolve the program to Microsoft XP given enough time."


Did I say that? I don't think I said that. I believe my post had to do with DNA, not Windows.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby AndyDufresne on Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:27 pm

universalchiro wrote:Nope, you don't understand genetic coding. You just told a computer programer, "it doesn't matter that your code is 100,000 characters in a specific order for specific function, nah any order with any characters will do just fine, because then random unguided mutations will evolve the program to Microsoft XP given enough time."

Sorry, Microsoft has stopped support for XP, so that evolution ain't happening.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24935
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Endgame422 on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:21 am

universalchiro wrote:ndgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.

First off I feel like you ignored my question and went on a tangent about amino acids and the probability of evolution. But as I read closer it appears you have indeed answered my question by ignoring it. If you were truly concerned that evolution should not be taught in schools because you thought the children should only hear facts instead of maybes and guesswork and incomplete theories,that would be one thing, but you seem to think that your guesswork and theories should replace it. If I've misunderstood you somehow please correct me by answering this one simple yes or no question. Should the citizens be taxed to teach Christianity in schools?
User avatar
Lieutenant Endgame422
 
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:35 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:45 am

Endgame422 wrote:
universalchiro wrote:ndgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.

First off I feel like you ignored my question and went on a tangent about amino acids and the probability of evolution. But as I read closer it appears you have indeed answered my question by ignoring it. If you were truly concerned that evolution should not be taught in schools because you thought the children should only hear facts instead of maybes and guesswork and incomplete theories,that would be one thing, but you seem to think that your guesswork and theories should replace it. If I've misunderstood you somehow please correct me by answering this one simple yes or no question. Should the citizens be taxed to teach Christianity in schools?

Taxed to teach truth, yes. Taxed to teach lies, no. If evolution was true then I wouldn't mind paying to have kids taught truth, but evolution is a lie.

Just look at the exclusivity of reproduction. Only the male human has Acrosomal capitulate enzyme to dissolve the female human egg. And the female human egg's shell is so receptor specific that it will only allow one enzyme on earth to dissolve her shell for fertilization. And its like this for all life. No cross breeding of kinds.
Evolution would not allow this exclusivity resulting in 100% of humans being 100% human, and 100% dogs being 100% dogs, and so on.
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby ooge on Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:14 am

Three major religions share father Abraham.How old was he and his wife again when they had their first child? I believe the text says in their 90's or 100's.Yup That is more believable then evolution. Enlighten religious people do not view evolution as a threat to their faith while others unfortunately are members of the flat earth society.
Image
User avatar
Captain ooge
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:31 am
Location: under a bridge

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby DoomYoshi on Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:40 am

universalchiro wrote:
Endgame422 wrote:
universalchiro wrote:ndgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.

First off I feel like you ignored my question and went on a tangent about amino acids and the probability of evolution. But as I read closer it appears you have indeed answered my question by ignoring it. If you were truly concerned that evolution should not be taught in schools because you thought the children should only hear facts instead of maybes and guesswork and incomplete theories,that would be one thing, but you seem to think that your guesswork and theories should replace it. If I've misunderstood you somehow please correct me by answering this one simple yes or no question. Should the citizens be taxed to teach Christianity in schools?

Taxed to teach truth, yes. Taxed to teach lies, no. If evolution was true then I wouldn't mind paying to have kids taught truth, but evolution is a lie.

Just look at the exclusivity of reproduction. Only the male human has Acrosomal capitulate enzyme to dissolve the female human egg. And the female human egg's shell is so receptor specific that it will only allow one enzyme on earth to dissolve her shell for fertilization. And its like this for all life. No cross breeding of kinds.
Evolution would not allow this exclusivity resulting in 100% of humans being 100% human, and 100% dogs being 100% dogs, and so on.


Ok, I asked viceroy this question about a hundred times and he never answered. Can you give me a definition of a species?

I can reproduce wolves with dingoes and dingoes with dogs or dogs with wolves or jackals with any of them. Yet they are all classified by most as totally different species.

I can cross ridiculous amounts of plants with each other.

Receptor specificity a)isn't that remarkable as most enzymes can totally change with a single DNA mutation b) isn't as accurate as we would like it to be.

The most important thing is for you to give me a definition of a species. I will then list every example I know of that destroys said definition.

When I was a kid, I was fascinated by Linnaeus. I bought my first legal alcohol for his 300th birthday. As soon as I looked at examples of how the Linnaen system worked, I realized it doesn't in any way reflect reality. "genus" and "species" are totally arbitrary terms that have no correspondence with any molecular evidence.

Darwin wrote a book called the "Origin of Species". I would argue there are no species, it is just an illusion of the human mind. Now give me a definition so I can destroy it.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10728
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Serbia on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:02 pm

Why are you idiots engaging each other?

Bollocks.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:22 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
universalchiro wrote:
Endgame422 wrote:
universalchiro wrote:ndgame, you only quoted last line, so does this mean you accept the first portion as a logical explanation of the harmony between the Bible and science of life's beginning?

Evolution is special, is the fastest faith based growing religion on earth and it has government funding , the citizens are taxed to teach evolution to children & its followers go around saying their faith is fact. Its the biggest lie on the planet.

There are 20 Amino acids and a sequential chain of 150 precisely organized chain of Amino acids makes one single protein. The possibilities is 2X10exp150 . That's just to make one protein, not even the more complicated DNA code. So the odds of random unguided formations formed a simple protein is 1 in 2,000,000,000,etc for 150 zeros. The odds are better to win the lottery.

First off I feel like you ignored my question and went on a tangent about amino acids and the probability of evolution. But as I read closer it appears you have indeed answered my question by ignoring it. If you were truly concerned that evolution should not be taught in schools because you thought the children should only hear facts instead of maybes and guesswork and incomplete theories,that would be one thing, but you seem to think that your guesswork and theories should replace it. If I've misunderstood you somehow please correct me by answering this one simple yes or no question. Should the citizens be taxed to teach Christianity in schools?

Taxed to teach truth, yes. Taxed to teach lies, no. If evolution was true then I wouldn't mind paying to have kids taught truth, but evolution is a lie.

Just look at the exclusivity of reproduction. Only the male human has Acrosomal capitulate enzyme to dissolve the female human egg. And the female human egg's shell is so receptor specific that it will only allow one enzyme on earth to dissolve her shell for fertilization. And its like this for all life. No cross breeding of kinds.
Evolution would not allow this exclusivity resulting in 100% of humans being 100% human, and 100% dogs being 100% dogs, and so on.


Ok, I asked viceroy this question about a hundred times and he never answered. Can you give me a definition of a species?

I can reproduce wolves with dingoes and dingoes with dogs or dogs with wolves or jackals with any of them. Yet they are all classified by most as totally different species.

I can cross ridiculous amounts of plants with each other.

Receptor specificity a)isn't that remarkable as most enzymes can totally change with a single DNA mutation b) isn't as accurate as we would like it to be.

The most important thing is for you to give me a definition of a species. I will then list every example I know of that destroys said definition.

When I was a kid, I was fascinated by Linnaeus. I bought my first legal alcohol for his 300th birthday. As soon as I looked at examples of how the Linnaen system worked, I realized it doesn't in any way reflect reality. "genus" and "species" are totally arbitrary terms that have no correspondence with any molecular evidence.

Darwin wrote a book called the "Origin of Species". I would argue there are no species, it is just an illusion of the human mind. Now give me a definition so I can destroy it.

The definition of species is still debated with many shades of grey, so I'll just go by what Merriam Dictionary has as the definition.
Species:1spe·cies
noun \ˈspē-(ˌ)shēz, -(ˌ)sēz\

biology : a group of animals or plants that are similar and can produce young animals or plants : a group of related animals or plants that is smaller than a genus.
: a particular group of things or people that belong together or have some shared quality
plural species
: a class of individuals having common attributes and designated by a common name; specifically : a logical division of a genus or more comprehensive class <confessing sins in species and in number>
: the human race : human beings —often used with the <survival of the species in the nuclear age>
: a category of biological classification ranking immediately below the genus or subgenus, comprising related organisms or populations potentially capable of interbreeding, and being designated by a binomial that consists of the name of a genus followed by a Latin or latinized uncapitalized noun or adjective agreeing grammatically with the genus name (2) : an individual or kind belonging to a biological species
: a particular kind of atomic nucleus, atom, molecule, or ion
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can reproduce wolves with dingoes and dingoes with dogs or dogs with wolves or jackals with any of them. Yet they are all classified by most as totally different species.
I agree with you, they are classified as different species, yet they are the same kind of animal. Where ever you go with this, you will just circle back to 100% of dogs are 100% dogs, and 100% humans are 100% human, and 100% cats are 100% cat. Evolution can't do that by definition. No matter which direction you mentally go, you are stuck with if we soaked any female egg of any creature on earth in a pool of spermatozoa of different kinds, there will never be fertilization. Why? only one kind of creature has the exact enzyme required to be received by the same kind of female egg. It's like this for ever egg on the planet. No crossbreeding, ever. Evolution would not do that, you can't box in evolution.

You are in a lose, lose scenario with this one. I would let this one go. You are better off just saying you believe evolution is truth and you go by faith. I will accept that and respect that. But I have no respect for evolutionist who see evidence that refutes evolution and they still proclaim it's fact, no faith required, they are intellectually blind and dishonest about science and the observable evidence.

--------------
On a side note: you claim to be a christian evolutionist, How do you handle Jesus quoting Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 by saying "have you not read that God made them male and female from the beginning. therefore man shall... Why would Jesus quote Genesis if we evolved from single cell prokaryote? Why would Jesus call man man that was man from the beginning?

Second inquiry: Since you don't take a literal reading of the Genesis creation account, when and by what arbitrary method to you jump in reading the Bible literally? Keep in mind that God Himself said in Number 12 that He speaks to Moses face to face as a friend does to a friend and not through veiled dreams nor visions. Also keep in mind that twice God said He created everything in 6 days and rested the 7th in Exodus 20 and Exodus 31 and twice wrote in stone the same thing.
Last edited by universalchiro on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby Serbia on Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:29 pm

universalchiro wrote:I already know your answer, but amuse me with your view.


You come across as extremely smug and arrogant. Doesn't help you win over converts.

Bollocks.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby DoomYoshi on Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:24 pm

universalchiro wrote:The definition of species is still debated with many shades of grey, so I'll just go by what Merriam Dictionary has as the definition.
Species:1spe·cies
noun \ˈspē-(ˌ)shēz, -(ˌ)sēz\

biology : a group of animals or plants that are similar and can produce young animals or plants : a group of related animals or plants that is smaller than a genus.
: a particular group of things or people that belong together or have some shared quality
plural species
: a class of individuals having common attributes and designated by a common name; specifically : a logical division of a genus or more comprehensive class <confessing sins in species and in number>
: the human race : human beings —often used with the <survival of the species in the nuclear age>
: a category of biological classification ranking immediately below the genus or subgenus, comprising related organisms or populations potentially capable of interbreeding, and being designated by a binomial that consists of the name of a genus followed by a Latin or latinized uncapitalized noun or adjective agreeing grammatically with the genus name (2) : an individual or kind belonging to a biological species

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not a biological definition. It refers to a biological definition, so its a non-answer. Is salmonella a species? What does "smaller than a genus" even mean?

I can reproduce wolves with dingoes and dingoes with dogs or dogs with wolves or jackals with any of them. Yet they are all classified by most as totally different species.
I agree with you, they are classified as different species, yet they are the same kind of animal. Where ever you go with this, you will just circle back to 100% of dogs are 100% dogs, and 100% humans are 100% human, and 100% cats are 100% cat. Evolution can't do that by definition. No matter which direction you mentally go, you are stuck with if we soaked any female egg of any creature on earth in a pool of spermatozoa of different kinds, there will never be fertilization. Why? only one kind of creature has the exact enzyme required to be received by the same kind of female egg. It's like this for ever egg on the planet. No crossbreeding, ever. Evolution would not do that, you can't box in evolution.


What is 100% human? Since Jesus' time, the average jaw size for humans has decreased 2%. We have visibly, statistically and genetically evolved in that short period of time. There are major genetic differences from Europeans compared to Asians. What percent genetic change would you need to see until you can no longer say that someone is 100% human? There are "humans" out there who are missing entire chromosomes!

--------------
On a side note: you claim to be a christian evolutionist, How do you handle Jesus quoting Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 by saying "have you not read that God made them male and female from the beginning. therefore man shall... Why would Jesus quote Genesis if we evolved from single cell prokaryote? Why would Jesus call man man that was man from the beginning?


Sometimes great visionaries have to put complex concepts in simpler terms to get their point across.
What about XXY men or born hermaphrodites or any number of gendered anomalies?

Second inquiry: Since you don't take a literal reading of the Genesis creation account, when and by what arbitrary method to you jump in reading the Bible literally? Keep in mind that God Himself said in Number 12 that He speaks to Moses face to face as a friend does to a friend and not through veiled dreams nor visions. Also keep in mind that twice God said He created everything in 6 days and rested the 7th in Exodus 20 and Exodus 31 and twice wrote in stone the same thing.


By what right do you take the Bible literally? From the writing of the New Testament until the canonization of the Bible, the two main schools of thought (from Greece/Rome and from Egypt) argued over whether it was to be taken allegorically or rhetorically. Few took it literally until the Enlightenment.

What do you make of Joshua 10:13?
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10728
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby universalchiro on Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:52 pm

DY, you are treading on thin ice by saying certain anomalies are less human. They are human all the same. Boy its such a fine edge evolutionist walk to not be racist by thinking some humans are less human.

I really don't care about the definition of species, that's not my baby its a word contrived by man to categorize things, so don't bother trying to pin anyone down with that. If Viceroy didn't answer you after you asked him 100X there is a plausible reason, why don't you define it. Have fun with it.
As far as Joshua 10 where God stopped the earth from spinning. I have no problem taking it literally. My God is powerful. I don't know how God accomplished that feat. Somethings are beyond comprehension.
What gives me the right to take Genesis account literally? I'm nobody of merit, I just follow Jesus example, He took Genesis creation account literally enough to quote it. God said He spoke to Moses clearly face to face, not veiled figurative language of dreams/visions. Also God said & wrote in stone twice He created everything in 6 days.
Be careful double talking by saying you believe in God , but not His Word.
Last edited by universalchiro on Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
General universalchiro
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:41 am
Location: Texas

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby denominator on Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:29 am

The taxonomy laid out by Linnaeus is a useful way of categorizing animals for determining relatedness. The generally accepted definition of the word, species is "a group of organisms that can reproduce offspring that are fertile". Meaning, all breeds of dog are a single species as they produce fertile dogs, but mules are not as they are the product of crossing a horse with a donkey.

Beyond that, there are broader groups of organisms in the genus, family, class, order, phylum, and kingdom categories. The lines between the categories is fairly well determined in extant species. It gets much blurrier in extinct species.

By using the term "kind", you are introducing new wording into the discussion. You MUST accurately define your term before anyone else can or will accept it. Kind, in this context, is not a term used by biologists, scientists, evolutionists, geneticists, or most other -ists you can come up with. This is a term from a specific book that is used by creationists to justify forcing their square peg worldview into the round hole of science. By vaguely defining your term, you are allowing yourself the freedom to define it however it best suits your argument, rather than using the proper evidence to support your points.

universalchiro wrote:DY, you are tready on thin ice by saying certain anomalies are less human. They are human all the same. Boy its such a fine edge evolutionist walk to not be racist by thinking some humans are less human.


I'm going to go ahead and ignore the last sentence because you are clearly taking DY's point completely out of context.

We can all agree that the various races of humanity are the same species. People of African descent, people of North American descent, and people of European descent are all part of the human species [Homo sapiens sapiens].

Where do the extinct hominin species fall on your spectrum, universalchiro? Species such as Homo neanderthalensis, Homo denosiva, and Homo heidelbergensis almost certainly were around at the same time as H. sapiens. There is a good deal of evidence that H. sapiens was mating with at least H. neanderthalensis, and likely with the other two as well. So do those other species count as "human"?

Let's go ahead and take it a step further. The time period that H. sapiens have been around overlaps with the time period that H. erectus was around (there were other hominim species around at that time as well, but for the sake of simplicity I'm ignoring them for now). Is one of these human, and one of them not?

Image
Image

Go one step further. Here's an image of a whole pile of various archaic ape, archaic human, hominid, hominum, hominoid, etc skulls. Tell me which ones are "human" and which ones are not.

Image

Tell me where you draw the line between one species and another. Tell me where one "kind" ends and another "kind" begins. Or are they all part of the "human kind"?
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class denominator
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 9:41 am
Location: Fort St John

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby DoomYoshi on Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:33 am

denominator wrote:
Beyond that, there are broader groups of organisms in the genus, family, class, order, phylum, and kingdom categories. The lines between the categories is fairly well determined in extant species. It gets much blurrier in extinct species.


Not really... only in megafauna are there any clear lines. From salamanders to birds to insects to plants there are so many taxonomic blurred lines. Even amongst the megafauna, taxonomies are constantly being revised. How many times have pandas switched from being bears to other crap? Raccoons have been considered bears and weasels by various taxonomists over the years. The arbitrary 7-layer taxonomic naming scheme is absolute bullshit also. Over the years, scientists have twisted their own heads in their asses by introducing subspecies, superfamilies and so ad infinitum.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10728
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: One of many problems with Evolution

Postby DoomYoshi on Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:06 pm

universalchiro wrote:As far as Joshua 10 where God stopped the earth from spinning. I have no problem taking it literally. My God is powerful. I don't know how God accomplished that feat. Somethings are beyond comprehension.


Um... what the f*ck translation are you using?

NIV: So the sun stood still,
NLT: So the sun stood still
ESV: And the sun stood still
KJV: And the sun stood still

You fucking troll.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10728
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

PreviousNext

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users