Question for theists...

Evolution is a word which means Chemical change for adaptation. It is proven and i have proven it. For exaple look at finches and newts. they evolve every few generations. Look up the word evolution, not the theory.
 
For we humans to assume the Big Bang and Intelligent design are the only two likely explanations for the start of the universe is setting the bar too high. We simply don't have the technology to find out for sure.

Maybe if we wait a couple hundred years, we might have more answers and the Big Bang might be dismissed as a 'primitive' theory, just as the belief that we are all made up of four elements (Fire, water wind and earth) that was commonly held in Greek society as a likely theory is now viewed as a primitive attempt to understand what was beyond their technological capabilities.
 
# A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
#

1. The process of developing.
2. Gradual development.

# Biology.

1. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
2. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.


YOu see it is a word, Aree you saying that all 50 types of finches never used to be the same type? We already know they have because we have watched new ones evolve!
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jim @ Sep. 26 2004,12:39)]For we humans to assume the Big Bang and Intelligent design are the only two likely explanations for the start of the universe is setting the bar too high. We simply don't have the technology to find out for sure.

Maybe if we wait a couple hundred years, we might have more answers and the Big Bang might be dismissed as a 'primitive' theory, just as the belief that we are all made up of four elements (Fire, water wind and earth) that was commonly held in Greek society as a likely theory is now viewed as a primitive attempt to understand what was beyond their technological capabilities.
Click to expand...
Suer, but im just saying it isnt impossible ofr their to be a GOd and a Big bang at the same time. Because of course God could have used an explosion to set things in motion.
 
Byblos, there is a huge difference between Evolution as you have defined it and Darwinian Evolution which tries to explain how life is descended from a single celled organism.
 
Actually, Byblos, the thing that still baffles scientists is speciation. Currently, there is still no irrefutable evidence that a species can evolve into an entirely new species (The theory that some types of dinosaur evolved into birds is an example).

Chemical changes is closer to micro evolution, not macro, which is the one the jury is still out on.
 
Notice how I said the WORD EVOLUTION and not the THEORY OF EVOLUTION,,,,

Yeah Jim, I also agree that no creature can change its type. (is that the right word) but I mean look at humans, we have all evolved into different races form Adam, have we not?
 
I'm not too sure about that. Black people have devolped their skin colour due to their natural habitat being humid and warm. Black skin is more protective than white in this situation.

Also, I find it difficult to believe that entire civilisations could have sprung up on remote areas like Australia and the Antarctic (Aborigines and Eskimos respectively). from a single family (Namely Noah, remember, we didn't directly evolve FROM Adam, but Noah and his family)
 
Ahah Jim, you have just explained the definition of evolution using blacks as an example.

Isnt Noah a descendant of Adam? And either way its the same thing.
 
This seems a litle weird. I am actually arguing with someone who is defending evolution.

What I described, using black people as an example, was adaptation, not evolution. Difference here. Evolution (macro) that details the changing of a species from one into an entirely different one has not been proven, and I think this is where we differ. I am more inclined to believe that it has happened, though I cannot prove it.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Isnt Noah a descendant of Adam? And either way its the same thing.
Click to expand...

Touche'.
 
Chemical changes ifor adaptation is the definition of Evolution. Changing Species is the Theory of Evolution, not the word.
 
Ahhhh.

I think I get it.
smile.gif


But i believe you are still reffering to micro evolution, not macro. They are recognised as the two main definitions of 'evolution'.
 
Well alright. BUT most epople only know the THEORY and dont know the word. therefor if they hear the word evolution they think of slimes becoming birds. What evolution really is, is a bird changing its beak shape to eat a different kind of nut :p
 
sure, Dinosuars could have definitly existed. but were all destroyed by the flood, which then one of each animal was surviving except the dinos. EX One type of Dog, which over time evolved into the different types of Dogs we see today.
 
Why were all the dinosaurs destroyed by the flood?  Wouldn't they have been on the ark?

And what about the sea faring dinosaurs?

And what does "could have definately" mean? Is that like almost maybe? Either they did or they didn't exist. And I don't remember anyone insinuating that dinosaurs DIDN'T exist.
 
They werent on the ark, except maybe alligator looking things obvoisly.

Could have definityl. means It could be definite, but it isnt.
 
Then just say it was probable.

And why, pray tell, weren't they on the ark? Didn't God command EVERY animal to be representative there?

And you failed to answer what happened to the seafaring dinosaurs.
 
One Dog is all of the Dogs, we dont know how many species of dog there were back then. Heck back then there could have been only one type of dog!

The seafaring dinosaurs... Im not to sure, There is a reason, they drown or something beacuse of the pressure, or no food... There is an answer i just cant think of it at the moment.
 
First, are you asserting that the alligator was the one and only representative of the dinosaurs?

Secondly, if the seafaring dinosaurs were wiped out due to the nature of the flood, how did any other seafaring creature survive? (Fish, dolphins, whales, etc) And above and beyond that, how did ANY plant life remain? Wouldn't the salt water have destroyed deciduous and evergreen trees?

And third, why is your text yellow?
smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top