Evolution

[johnnylightnin]

You guys realize that there IS PLENTY OF perceptual evidence for evolution unlike the invisible gremlin, right?

For microevolution...not macro. You've got to have faith for macroevolution...I always knew you were a man of faith.

[arkansasbob]

You guys realize that Darwin is not the authority on evolution. He was the first to propose the theory back in 1859 A LONG TIME before we have MOST of the evidence in favor of it. 150 years later ALL of the scientific evidence still backs the theory. I think the vestigial evidence is very compelling. Seeing aquatic creatures like dolphins that have vesitges of legs (shows up only when the dolphin is a fetus) and animals that live on land that have vestiges of an aquatic heritage is intriguing. Post Darwin we have also discovered many fossils of the intermediates.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comd..._intermediates

I take it you guys don't really want to educate yourselves on the evidence that is out there?

i haven't read nearly all of the article you linked, but check out this quote:

As every graduate student in scientific research knows (or eventually learns, perhaps the hard way), arguments based upon negative evidence are very weak scientific arguments, especially in the absence of proper positive controls. Thus, based on the fossil remains of modern species and the known gaps in the current paleontological records of extinct species, the observation of transitional species "out of order" by 40 million years should be fairly common.

is that supposed to be a logical argument? non sequitur. not even close. these two sentences do not even belong in the same paragraph.

[Guisslapp]

You are right. The second part of that quote does not appear to follow from the first.

[saltydawg]

^
The reason why a lot of posters here don't accept evolution is because of their religious beliefs. They believe that God created the Universe and the Earth and all its creatures in 6 days and that is the end of the story. You can't reason with religious beliefs because by their very natural they are unprovable and illogical. Sure, to you and me homo sapiens are just a bunch of monkeys with huge brains but to our Christian brothers and sisters Mankind and creation was formed on purpose, that we are a special group that is separated from the rest of the animal kingdom.

You would be better off discussing the idea that people have a soul whereas other animals don't.

[johnnylightnin]

The reason why a lot of posters here don't accept evolution is because of their religious beliefs.

There are many evangelical Christians who believe in an old earth. They believe God used evolution and that the "six days" stand for six epochs. In short, yet again, you're talking out of your back-side.

I dismiss macro-evolution as a scientist. The evidence for macro-evolution is shoddy at best. It takes just as much faith to believe in macro-evolution as it does to believe in a creator. Of course, Scientific American or whatever you read doesn't say so, so you won't actually look at the evidence and draw your own conclusions.

Did you know that Darwin's finches devolved after the drought? Did you know that the peppered moths in the photo in your high school science book were dead and were placed on the tree trunk for the photo (those moths inhabit the canopy of the trees that didn't change color, not the trunks that did)?

I expect not.

[Guisslapp]

Darwin's studies are not really the centerpiece of evolution anymore, but you probably realize that since you got a bioscience degree.

[arkansasbob]

Darwin's studies are not really the centerpiece of evolution anymore, but you probably realize that since you got a bioscience degree.

true, but darwin's work is what triggered a revolution in biological study. ever since darwin, the focus of 99% of research biologists and paleantologists has been on finding evidence of evolution. the majority of darwin's theories have been discredited in the process, so they have found new ones to replace them (many of which have also been since discredited). the fact is that evolutionary science is much the same as global warming science. if you don't find evidence of evolution, your study was a failure. thus, only that which supports the foundation of evolution is reported, and there is much pressure to stretch the significance. as a result, modern macro-evolution is on no sturdier footing than darwin's original work.

[arkansasbob]

true, but darwin's work is what triggered a revolution in biological study. ever since darwin, the focus of 99% of research biologists and paleantologists has been on finding evidence of evolution. the majority of darwin's theories have been discredited in the process, so they have found new ones to replace them (many of which have also been since discredited). the fact is that evolutionary science is much the same as global warming science. if you don't find evidence of evolution, your study was a failure. thus, only that which supports the foundation of evolution is reported, and there is much pressure to stretch the significance. as a result, modern macro-evolution is on no sturdier footing than darwin's original work.

and i use the words darwinism and darwinist to describe macro-evolution and its prophets -- not just darwin's work alone.

[Guisslapp]

true, but darwin's work is what triggered a revolution in biological study. ever since darwin, the focus of 99% of research biologists and paleantologists has been on finding evidence of evolution. the majority of darwin's theories have been discredited in the process, so they have found new ones to replace them (many of which have also been since discredited). the fact is that evolutionary science is much the same as global warming science. if you don't find evidence of evolution, your study was a failure. thus, only that which supports the foundation of evolution is reported, and there is much pressure to stretch the significance. as a result, modern macro-evolution is on no sturdier footing than darwin's original work.

What specifically has been discredited?

[saltydawg]

^
Nothing has been discredited, it's just their old song and dance routine......6 days, 6 epochs,,,a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

I dare any of the anti-evolution folks here to deny that they have a soul given to them by God, that they are a special creature created in God's image.

[saltydawg]

There are many evangelical Christians who believe in an old earth. They believe God used evolution and that the "six days" stand for six epochs. In short, yet again, you're talking out of your back-side.

I dismiss macro-evolution as a scientist. The evidence for macro-evolution is shoddy at best. It takes just as much faith to believe in macro-evolution as it does to believe in a creator. Of course, Scientific American or whatever you read doesn't say so, so you won't actually look at the evidence and draw your own conclusions.

Did you know that Darwin's finches devolved after the drought? Did you know that the peppered moths in the photo in your high school science book were dead and were placed on the tree trunk for the photo (those moths inhabit the canopy of the trees that didn't change color, not the trunks that did)?

I expect not.

Perhaps you would like to tell us that if Homo Sapien did not evolve from lower life forms, just actually what you, as a scientist, propose as a reasonable theory to explain our presence here.

[marketdawg]

This is one great debate going on here! I wish I had more time to follow it but I've got to get in my boat and sail across the seas, being careful not to sail off the edge of the flat earth, avoiding all the great sea dragons and wearing sunscreen to protect myself from the sun (which revolves around the flat earth).

[saltydawg]

This is one great debate going on here! I wish I had more time to follow it but I've got to get in my boat and sail across the seas, being careful not to sail off the edge of the flat earth, avoiding all the great sea dragons and wearing sunscreen to protect myself from the sun (which revolves around the flat earth).

marketdawg, still time for you to make the opening day.

http://www.creationmuseum.org/

I know that Johnny is going to be there. I bet he is a charter member.

[marketdawg]

Can't make that opening..that is also the opening of Dodo bird hunting season. They taste great, sort of like a passsenger pigeon. :icon_wink:

[arkansasbob]

What specifically has been discredited?

i don't have time to list it all, but i will try to find you a link.