Creation Vs. Evolution

kash959 said:
Blue planet is amazing... Is the deep sea volcanoes about those hot vents that give out toxic gases but some bacteria can transform that into energy which feeds crabs and stuff?
Click to expand...

Basically bro! It talks about at the bottom of the ocean like 12,000 feet deep there is life! where it is hot enough to boil a lobster, and these little tiny worms, have the exact same kind of blood that HUMANS do. tell me we did not evolve! Watch it!! Volcanoes of the deep sea its fucking amazing!!
 
Evolution hands down! I always believed in evolution but after reading Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection, it is painfully obvious that this is how life has evolved. God has nothing to do with it, there is no such thing as "God".
 
gangjababy said:
Evolution hands down! I always believed in evolution but after reading Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection, it is painfully obvious that this is how life has evolved. God has nothing to do with it, there is no such thing as "God".
Click to expand...

God is natural selection.
 
Well if you can't even make sense of your own statement...
Like I've said God has nothing to do with it, there is no God.
Evolution just makes sense, you can see it everyday. The strong survive and the weak die only the strong or those best suited to their environment pass their genes on to the next generation, and overtime species evolve.
 
gangjababy said:
Evolution hands down! I always believed in evolution but after reading Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection, it is painfully obvious that this is how life has evolved. God has nothing to do with it, there is no such thing as "God".
Click to expand...

Ok, evolution does happen dude but can you please refer to me how love in human beings have evolved and the ability to dream. Also, in evolutionary terms, what are the benefits of these two things?
 
animals dream, its been proven that they have "complex" dreams so its very possible that we dream because of evolution, and that through evolution the dreams have become more complex and hidden with the deep meaning that dreams really are.

if you wanted to get technical you could say that love is your body's chemical reaction to a certain pheromone that only a certain few carry perhaps we are attracted to those pheromones because our breeding would be beneficial to the offspring and help create a longer living more intelligent human race we've already evolved since Egyptian times, those dudes were short as hell
 
kash959 said:
Ok, evolution does happen dude but can you please refer to me how love in human beings have evolved and the ability to dream. Also, in evolutionary terms, what are the benefits of these two things?
Click to expand...
If you stop and think about the evolutionary benefit of "love" it quickly becomes obvious, especially for the weak naked apes that we are. If you're really curious about finding evolutionary explanations for things that go on in our brains, I suggest finding some Vilayanur Ramachandran (he's on Ted.com). Also, for evolution in general, E.O. Williams, and maybe some Richard Dawkins (although, he's a wee bit acerbic at times).

Now, for all (us) evolutionists, anyone wanna try on punctuated equilibrium on for size?
 
TodayIsAGreenday said:
animals dream, its been proven that they have "complex" dreams so its very possible that we dream because of evolution, and that through evolution the dreams have become more complex and hidden with the deep meaning that dreams really are.

if you wanted to get technical you could say that love is your body's chemical reaction to a certain pheromone that only a certain few carry perhaps we are attracted to those pheromones because our breeding would be beneficial to the offspring and help create a longer living more intelligent human race we've already evolved since Egyptian times, those dudes were short as hell
Click to expand...

So you are saying that just because animals dream, we do too?!? How do animals dream then and how is that useful in evolutionary terms. Also, this stuff about phermomones is actually not quite right if you think about it because we have developed deodorant which gets rid of body odour. Now, why would we try to get rid of the smell that's suppose to attract us to each other. Seems to be doing the opposite.
Also, phermone has nothing to do with love. You can fall in love with people over the internet. Which phermones are involved there.
I'm not saying evolution doesn't happen at all. Things do change and adapt. But there are things that have not changed for millions of years at all. Evolution on it's own doesn't explain everything. It certainly doesn't explain the physical conditions required for life and how they came to be...
Also, look into people who have come out in the open and admitted that they were forced to admit things about evolution that weren't true and these are scientists and museum people...
 
kash959 said:
So you are saying that just because animals dream, we do too?!? How do animals dream then and how is that useful in evolutionary terms. Also, this stuff about phermomones is actually not quite right if you think about it because we have developed deodorant which gets rid of body odour. Now, why would we try to get rid of the smell that's suppose to attract us to each other. Seems to be doing the opposite.
Also, phermone has nothing to do with love. You can fall in love with people over the internet. Which phermones are involved there.
I'm not saying evolution doesn't happen at all. Things do change and adapt. But there are things that have not changed for millions of years at all. Evolution on it's own doesn't explain everything. It certainly doesn't explain the physical conditions required for life and how they came to be...
Also, look into people who have come out in the open and admitted that they were forced to admit things about evolution that weren't true and these are scientists and museum people...
Click to expand...
Do some research on pheromones before you go making such an argument. If I listed which pheromones did what, would you even absorb the information, let alone retain it? To start, pheromones do not have an actual "smell" that we can consciously perceive. From an article talking about pheromone sensory organs in the nose:
According to most biology textbooks, detection of pheromones takes place in a specialized structure, called the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Although the VNO resides in the nasal cavity, the pheromone sensory system is distinct from the sense of smell, as are the chemical receptors involved. In animals possessing a pheromone sensory system -- including mice, dogs, cats, and elephants -- the system governs a range of genetically preprogrammed mating, social ranking, maternal, and territorial defense behaviors.
Click to expand...
Please note, pheromones in the animal world are NOT limited to mammals, that makes this article a little misleading. I believe there are plenty of invertebrates that use pheromones.

Evolution, by the way, isn't an explanation for the requirements of life. This demonstrates that you don't quite understand the forces behind evolution, the first of which dictates that the organism, in order to live, must adapt to the environment, not the other way around.

As for dreaming, it seems to be related to play in animals (and, for the record, we're animals, too), in that the higher the level of cognition (also sometimes referred to as intelligence, a deceptive term) the more likely the organism is to play and dream.
 
Was talking about this with my old man one day. He brought up an interesting point. If you look at possible "evidence" for evolution you find that in almost every case evolution has taken something away never added. Like snakes that still have little nubbies where their legs once were.

In the case of pheromones. It doesn't matter how much deodorant you wear your pheromones are still detectible in the subconscience. I learned in audio ingineering that you can hear a pin drop even in a busy contsruction site, not consciencly but physically your brain still picks it up. There is an isometric chamber 1-2 miles underground where they study sound and other stuff. When inside this chamber all other "noise" is so well quieted that you can hear the blood flow thru your body, every little gurgle etc. They say because of the relative quietness just talking in there can damage your ears.

seamaiden what's this all about? punctuated equilibrium?
 
Ahhh I see now.
Punctuated equilibrium is a theory of evolutionary biology which states that most sexually reproducing populations experience little change for most of their geological history, and that when phenotypic evolution does occur, it is localized in rare, rapid events of branching speciation (called cladogenesis).
Punctuated equilibrium is commonly contrasted against the theory of phyletic gradualism, which states that evolution generally occurs uniformly and by the steady and gradual transformation of whole lineages (anagenesis). In this view, evolution is seen as generally smooth and continuous.
In 1972 paleontologists Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould published a landmark paper developing this idea. Their paper was built upon Ernst Mayr's theory of geographic speciation, I. Michael Lerner's theories of developmental and genetic homeostasis, as well as their own empirical research. Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism championed by Charles Darwin was virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
 
mexiblunt said:
Was talking about this with my old man one day. He brought up an interesting point. If you look at possible "evidence" for evolution you find that in almost every case evolution has taken something away never added. Like snakes that still have little nubbies where their legs once were.
Click to expand...
Give us time and we'll find opposite examples.

mexiblunt said:
seamaiden what's this all about? punctuated equilibrium?
Click to expand...
I see you found it. It's been controversial in some scientific circles, as controversial as plate tectonics were 40+ years ago. However, toss in epigenetics and..... :shock:
 
mexiblunt said:
Was talking about this with my old man one day. He brought up an interesting point. If you look at possible "evidence" for evolution you find that in almost every case evolution has taken something away never added. Like snakes that still have little nubbies where their legs once were.
Click to expand...


That's not true. It's a fairly common anti-evolution argument that has been thoroughly debunked.

If you're seriously interested in evolutionary biology, you should read a few of Richard Dawkins' books. The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, River Out Of Eden, The Ancestor's Tale are all very good. The first two are very detailed, the other two are an easier read.

Here's another interesting resource from The New Scientist magazine.

Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions
 
Ooo... Dawkins can be SO rough, though.. How about something people can see on Ted.com? E.O. Wilson (edited! got his name wrong, dammit!) or Ramachandran, mayhaps? Was Dawkins on Ted.com..? Gimme a few...
 
Seamaiden said:
Ooo... Dawkins can be SO rough, though.. How about something people can see on Ted.com? E.O. Wilson (edited! got his name wrong, dammit!) or Ramachandran, mayhaps? Was Dawkins on Ted.com..? Gimme a few...
Click to expand...

I did say seriously interested.

I haven't read E.O. Wilson or Ramachandran. I'll have to check them out when I get an open spot on my reading list.

Thanks for the tip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

meangreengrowinmachine
Why I think the "Fermi Paradox" is no longer a valid way to think about the universe
Replies
2
Views
578
Heisenberg
Heisenberg
secretmicrogrow420
400nm is adequate to activate these triggers…. UVR8 receptors….. Lets put it to bed
Replies
0
Views
80
secretmicrogrow420
secretmicrogrow420
P
Storm last night, should I just harvest?
Replies
1
Views
275
Paranoidandroid42
P
C
PM in veg. Clone dunk sulfur?
Replies
10
Views
798
!CORAL!REEFER!
C
unclejoebob
The great THC-A vs THC debate
Replies
3
Views
195
CarolinaPotheadsNew
CarolinaPotheadsNew
Back
Top