On topic, I haven't read much of the thread but saying you believe in micro evolution but not macro is like saying you believe in inches but don't buy the evidence for feet
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:35 am
by bright maroon
WOOOOO...BIG UP YOUR CHEST
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:50 am
by knell
am I really reading this thread in 2011
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:55 am
by IC0N
"More than thirty years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to it's solution. At present all discussions on principle theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance."
Klaus Dose
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 3:50 am
by jrisreal
I'm a creationist...but I'm not sure where I stand on whether evolution is real or not. I mean, a fish can't wait millions of years to develop gills can it? It would die before reproduction...thats one reason I feel iffy about the theory. But I believe that if evolution is real, it was brought into effect by God. When the Bible says that the world was created in 6 days, I believe that it may not be utilizing the word 'day' the same way as we commonly do. A day might be defined as a very long period of time. Periods of time in which the sun formed, then the earth and the moon then the fish of the sea then the other animals that may or may not have evolved from the previous. I hope this makes sense to you. I'll probably be ridiculed for posting this anyway.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:03 am
by Phigure
jrisreal wrote:I'm a creationist...but I'm not sure where I stand on whether evolution is real or not. I mean, a fish can't wait millions of years to develop gills can it? It would die before reproduction...thats one reason I feel iffy about the theory
gills developed as the most efficient variation on gas permeable skin...
Everyone knows that for functions relating to surface area...
the more surface area revealed - the more effective...
ripples in the skin - probably a result of an accidental concentration of capillary growth
increases oxygen absorbtion...TWO FOLD
because of the extra capillaries in conjunction with the increased surface area...
- thus making the ripple skinned creature GREATLY more successful at respiration...
animal gets faster - better at feeding and escaping...and thus mating
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:10 am
by jrisreal
Phigure wrote:
jrisreal wrote:I'm a creationist...but I'm not sure where I stand on whether evolution is real or not. I mean, a fish can't wait millions of years to develop gills can it? It would die before reproduction...thats one reason I feel iffy about the theory
I know that life originated in the water. But that link is interesting...thanks.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:17 am
by bright maroon
ooohhh..salinity....
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:18 am
by SunkLo
Bm coming in hard with two seemingly sensible posts in a row...
Edit:combo breaker
Also re: no organs ever being witnessed in transition, you ever heard of an appendix? Redundant organ of evolutionary leftovers.
Unless god thought "Let's put in this one random organ.........just to fuck with them"
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:30 am
by ThomasEll
bright maroon wrote:..more like...
gills developed as the most efficient variation on gas permeable skin...
Everyone knows that for functions relating to surface area...
the more surface area revealed - the more effective...
ripples in the skin - probably a result of an accidental concentration of capillary growth
increases oxygen absorbtion...TWO FOLD
because of the extra capillaries in conjunction with the increased surface area...
- thus making the ripple skinned creature GREATLY more successful at respiration...
animal gets faster - better at feeding and escaping...and thus mating
Intelligent BM post
Bringing some sanity into a topic for once as well
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 4:58 am
by Soiree
nature vs nurture
the battle continues
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:10 am
by bigfootspartan
knell wrote:am I really reading this thread in 2011
+1
snypadub wrote:
I find it difficult to believe we all come from rocks (Evolutionists: This is what you believe),
Creationism makes much more sense both logically speaking and the evidence is stronger.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:29 am
by Psyche
bright maroon wrote:I have another good example...is a true story...
In the realm of professional rock climbing...
the sport itself had reaches a sort of plateau in regards to...
performance increases....
meaning..that when advancements were made in the sport
...it was usually by 10ths of a second...at the highest levels...
Well - this 12 year old girl came into a competition...and in a single shot
trumped the world record by something like 18 seconds...
and it stunned the rock climbing world...
because not only did she shred in general...but people of her age were generally found...
not just on a learning curve - but on a physical capacity curve to be - incapable.
So national geographic studied her and they found some very interesting things in regards to...
developmental conditioning....
This girl - grew up some place tropical - south africa I think..
and when she was a baby - had a pet monkey
At a very young age, she started following this monkey up into the tree canopies..
and spent alot of her time there with them...
She had no fear of heights
Her arms grew proportionate not to that of a human..but to a monkey
and they detected a change in her metabolic systems...
- she processed energy - metabolically - different than most standard human beings
The scientist studying her believe - that the extreme conditioning she underwent
at such a volitile developmental stage - affected her development as a creature - structurally.
Only issue is that this doesn't really apply to evolution of a species. She was conditioned to be that way. Her genetics remain untouched. If she reproduces, this "conditioning" will not automatically pass down to her children.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:38 am
by bigfootspartan
SunkLo wrote:Bm coming in hard with two seemingly sensible posts in a row...
Edit:combo breaker
Also re: no organs ever being witnessed in transition, you ever heard of a spleen? Redundant organ of evolutionary leftovers.
Unless god thought "Let's put in this one random organ.........just to fuck with them"
Spleens are kind of important, maybe you meant appendix?
Reminds me of a recurring quote from my anatomy professor. "If a god really did create us, he forgot....." or "If he was really smart, he would have done this like ....."
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:56 am
by SunkLo
Yeah I certainly did
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:06 am
by knell
I'll post this video in every relevant thread:
well worth the watch. and no, i don't mean in the "zomg aliens conspiracy" sense. i mean... watch it, think about it, research the data, learn something sense.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 7:16 am
by kidshuffle
knell wrote:I'll post this video in every relevant thread:
well worth the watch. and no, i don't mean in the "zomg aliens conspiracy" sense. i mean... watch it, think about it, research the data, learn something sense.
Re: Evolution
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:46 am
by magma
Evolution's a difficult one because it's so hard to actually observe, given that it takes place very haphazardly over lots of generations (one human will never witness evolution in anything bigger than bacteria) and when it does occur, it takes tens or hundreds of generations for the genes to spread into the main breeding population. The only way to "observe" it is to look at isolated populations with different environmental needs.
Luckily, we have such an isolated human population!
If you're interested, have a read up on physiological differences between us (i.e. low-living humans) and Sherpas who've been breeding in isolation high in the Hymalayas... they have totally different ways of dealing with altitude (and hence don't get altitude sickness). They have a much more complex and dense structure of capillaries and high levels of mitochondria which allows a higher surface area capable of pulling more oxygen from the air. Recent studies show this isn't something you get from "training" or spending a long time in high altitude... Sherpas are born able to exist on high and they rarely, if ever, suffer from altitude sickness.
I.e. Not just missing links or random bacteria, but Homo Sapiens has been shown to evolve... not just that, we're currently evolving.
