12th December 2005, 7:50 AM
Biggah/
Evolution is a theory, but how all living things change over time is fact. Evolution is how we explain it. The fact that the tides on Earth alter in unison to the movement of the moon is a fact, we theorize that it's because of gravity but whether or not that theory is correct, the tides still react to the moon's movement as a fact.
I agree, and that God created a system for life to evolve over time based on need.
Half of Creationism - God is the creator of all things, science tells us that the current life on Earth came from thousands, millions, even billions of years of evolution and change. God created the first living cells and everything after that was formed by his perfect system of evolution.
http://www.google.com - I'm not your teacher, i'm here to discuss the information, not to help someone realize it who has yet to be educated of it. Have fun.
DJ/ I can see the principals of your theory but you're using mutation as a way to explain it. Mutation is random, i agree, but it is not so random as to make an animal totally different than it was. You explain that mutation made the animal longer and thinner (which would mean that the entire animal would have to change how it's body works and also canceling out any evolutionary pros it's collected up to that point and would most likely not be able to survive with such a retarded form) But why is it that the same species of arthropod in the region went seperate paths and created one that looks like a stremlined version of the original species and one looks like plant life.
One little ferret like animal (a warm blooded type of lizard) is responsible for all mammals on earth. If you look at a ferret you can see every mammal on earth, all the same principals apply aside from slight differences such as a ferret that, because of bouancy in water, is able to grow to massive size and move it's nasal passages to it's head to take gulps of air while swimming and instead of relying on teeth to breakdown heavy bone and tissues it simply scoops up millions of microscopic or small species of marine life and filters out the poisonous (if ingested) salt water. A cat is a giant ferret with slight modifications, so is a horse, but a good example of oddity that came from the tiny mammal is the ape that if you looked at its evolution you would see is clearly ferret like as a small monkey.
But at no time, in any evolution of living things, can we see a clear formulation for the animal to take on characteristics of a plant and to say that 'random mutations' brough it to that point makes absolutely no sense. You just litteraly said 'it mutated in to a stick' which simply does not happen for any reason in the world. We're not talking about color here, we're talking about specific textures, patterns of color and very odd shapes that just happen to look exactly like specific plant life in the area which means it was able to reach its current form in the same amount of time as the ice ages to now and no amount of mutation would be able to make it look that specific in that amount of time. Not even human beings evolve or changed that fast.
Quote:Point of fact, evolution is merely a THEORY. It's a theory because it can't be conclusively proven.
Evolution is a theory, but how all living things change over time is fact. Evolution is how we explain it. The fact that the tides on Earth alter in unison to the movement of the moon is a fact, we theorize that it's because of gravity but whether or not that theory is correct, the tides still react to the moon's movement as a fact.
Quote:How can the theory of intelligent design be half true and the validity of the theory of evolution be beyond question? First of all, they contradict each other. To believe that the complexities that exist in nature and the universe began without the direction of a supreme being is, in my opinion, arrogant. The regular motion of the planets and galaxy, the fact that an egg and a sperm join together and differentiate into different types of tissue (eye, lung, bone, brain, etc) and that for the most part, you don't have ears on your elbows, or eyes on your stomach. The balance that exists in nature. All things denote there is a God.
I agree, and that God created a system for life to evolve over time based on need.
Half of Creationism - God is the creator of all things, science tells us that the current life on Earth came from thousands, millions, even billions of years of evolution and change. God created the first living cells and everything after that was formed by his perfect system of evolution.
Quote:Another blatant contradiction (in another thread) was that you were taking bits of the bible and proclaiming them as fact (such as god has no form) and disputing other parts of the bible as heresay (Christ literally being the physical son of god).[quote]
The Hebrews wrote the bible and the one god ideal, all of Christianity is based on the hebrew faith with the addition of the new testament which was written by the Catholics. So since Christianity is based on the original hebrew with 'additions' it's easy to see that in the old testament (the bible) God has no form and then written by the catholics 'Christ is the son of God' (which contradicts everything written in the bible) is easily seen to be false. The old testament has many truths in it and actual history. The new testament is more lies than truth and was written by a government thousands of years later after the bible.
[quote]You often state that something has been proven, but fail to provide the proof.
http://www.google.com - I'm not your teacher, i'm here to discuss the information, not to help someone realize it who has yet to be educated of it. Have fun.
DJ/ I can see the principals of your theory but you're using mutation as a way to explain it. Mutation is random, i agree, but it is not so random as to make an animal totally different than it was. You explain that mutation made the animal longer and thinner (which would mean that the entire animal would have to change how it's body works and also canceling out any evolutionary pros it's collected up to that point and would most likely not be able to survive with such a retarded form) But why is it that the same species of arthropod in the region went seperate paths and created one that looks like a stremlined version of the original species and one looks like plant life.
One little ferret like animal (a warm blooded type of lizard) is responsible for all mammals on earth. If you look at a ferret you can see every mammal on earth, all the same principals apply aside from slight differences such as a ferret that, because of bouancy in water, is able to grow to massive size and move it's nasal passages to it's head to take gulps of air while swimming and instead of relying on teeth to breakdown heavy bone and tissues it simply scoops up millions of microscopic or small species of marine life and filters out the poisonous (if ingested) salt water. A cat is a giant ferret with slight modifications, so is a horse, but a good example of oddity that came from the tiny mammal is the ape that if you looked at its evolution you would see is clearly ferret like as a small monkey.
But at no time, in any evolution of living things, can we see a clear formulation for the animal to take on characteristics of a plant and to say that 'random mutations' brough it to that point makes absolutely no sense. You just litteraly said 'it mutated in to a stick' which simply does not happen for any reason in the world. We're not talking about color here, we're talking about specific textures, patterns of color and very odd shapes that just happen to look exactly like specific plant life in the area which means it was able to reach its current form in the same amount of time as the ice ages to now and no amount of mutation would be able to make it look that specific in that amount of time. Not even human beings evolve or changed that fast.