OGIONIK
 
  2  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2008 11:25 pm
@ebrown p,
what did god make adam and eve out of? dirt.

tell me thats not evolution stated in a very condensed manner.
RexRed
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 11:40 pm
@OGIONIK,
Quote:
what did god make adam and eve out of? dirt.

tell me thats not evolution stated in a very condensed manner.


It is a little more than that.

the body = dirt/dust
the soul = air/breath
the spirit = image of God

three fold being Smile
tenderfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Nov, 2008 05:55 pm
@RexRed,

It is a little more than that.

the body = dirt/dust
the soul = air/breath
the spirit = image of God

three fold being

Translation--- man is full of sh-t
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Nov, 2008 06:07 pm
@OGIONIK,
So, you think men evolved, and then women evolved later, since Adam was walking around (per the Bible) well before Eve was alive?
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Nov, 2008 06:10 pm
@edgarblythe,
He can speak for himself, but I got the impression OGIONIK is not a biblical literalist.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Nov, 2008 06:24 pm
@tenderfoot,
Hi tenderfoot (The veruca)-

How's it going?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Nov, 2008 09:33 pm
@OGIONIK,
Quote:
what did god make adam and eve out of? dirt.
tell me thats not evolution stated in a very condensed manner.

Very very condensed.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Nov, 2008 07:38 am
@rosborne979,
Efficient he means. Fast use of language.

A bit difficult for the stupid admittedly.
0 Replies
 
curtis73
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 02:59 am
@vol fan06,
"but evolution outside of that seems ridiculous. a monkey turning into a man. why does it not happen now then? "

It does... all the time. For example, the chorus frog known as the Spring Peeper was being watched for a very long time, genetically studied, and its evolution carefully charted. About 10 years ago, a very specific critical genetic change occurred. Spring Peeper used to be Hyla crucifer, but it is now Pseudoacris cruicifer.

Evolution is a very simple process but it takes a very long time to happen. Genetic traits that are undesirable have less chance of passing them on. For instance, let's say you were born with a genetically inherited disease that causes everyone affected with it to die before the age of 10. You will not be able to have children because of this, and therefore you won't be able to pass on that defective gene to another generation. The result is that the defect genetically selects itself for extinction. Its important to note that natural selection is just that; natural. Its not active, its passive. If we suddenly enter an ice age, people who are genetically set up for fat storage and body hair might survive better than skinny hairless people. Its not that WE change ourselves based on the environment, its that the environment just reduces the chances of a non-surviving trait being passed on. Its not tough to grasp, it just requires a little thought.

Take a walk around an old farm house. Just 100 years ago, humans were MUCH shorter. Try to take a nap under your great grandmother's quilt and try to fit under the 5' blanket. Now, extrapolate that over a very long period of time. If we were 1' shorter just 100 years ago, what might have happened since the beginning of time? A bipedal hominid (not a monkey) becoming a man? Absolutely possible. Why do you think that evolution couldn't do that? Where does it say in the bible that god created man to look like you do today? Think about the things that have happened in your short life; I'm sure you've noticed things like a spring with a notable increase in frogs, or bugs, or a certain flower. That is natural selection at work. Something about the environment changed; rainfall, temperature, humidity, a late freeze, an early thaw... something. It caused a situation in which certain organisms were favored and others squelched. If that continues over a long period, the change of the species is inevitable.

There are two forms of natural selection. One is purely natural. This can be observed in places like the Galapagos islands. Scientists have gone to great lengths to not disturb the isolation of the islands and have observed speciation at its most pure level. The other kind is imposed. For instance, mother nature couldn't have anticipated air travel, so if a tourist brings home a clipping of Kudzu from Africa and plants it in their back yard (this is an actual documented situation) and it takes over and basically eradicates three species of tree, two species of shrub, and endangers countless insect species, that is abonormally accelerating the process.

Think of it this way... if natural selection didn't exist, the earth would be dead. If adaptation from natural selection DIDN'T occur, everything would die as the environment changed. Instead, it simply selects certain traits that thrive and weeds out traits that aren't favorable.

It doesn't violate your precious bible. God created man in his own image. The bible also says that it is impossible for us to see the face of god. So how do we know what god created? What if god looks like an ameoba?

I personally believe in god, but I personally know that the bible requires faith to believe. But, I refuse to swallow a bunch of contradictions and hooey when the simple, truthful answer is in front of me.

Your question that I quoted above I will answer with another question: If all of those radical miracles happened in the bible, like a worldwide flood, a burning bush, parting of the red sea, feeding the masses with a few loaves and fish... why does it not happen now?

Your grasp of logic has been subverted by faith. If you want to truly know the answers to these questions you have to look at it objectively and ask questions like, "for a minute, let me look at this as if the bible were incorrect." That doesn't require conspiring with the devil, it just calls upon you to use your logical mind instead of fearfully clinging to your crutch.

I think I know what your next question will be... "if man came from monkeys, then why do we still have monkeys?" If that is truly a question you can't answer with your own logic, then you are exactly what the christian church wants. Congrats on finding your home.
0 Replies
 
curtis73
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 03:32 am
@vol fan06,
"Evolution states that all different species evolve from a common ancestor. "
That is not true. That is what the church purports, but they are incorrect.

"What we can observe indicates that the exact opposite occurs. Does the evolutionary process have a reverse gear? Put a male and female of 50 different species of dogs on an island - totally isolated from outside influence- and come back in 25 years. What you will find is a lot of dogs with very similar characteristics. They have gone from specific species to a similar species. Evolution in reverse"

Your grasp of biology is entirely incorrect, remedial, and otherwise fully flawed. First of all, all dog breeds are the same species. If they were not, they could not breed anything but sterile offspring, or not breed at all. What you describing is phenotype leveling and hybridization. The same could be true of humans. Put 50 blacks and 50 whites on an island and come back 100 years later. You would have a whole bunch of brown humans. That is NOT evolution, that is simple physical traits that are passed on.

A more accurate analogy of evolution would be to modify your dogs-on-an-island proposition: Take 50 dogs of mixed breeds and put them on a tropical island. Take the same basic 50 dogs and put them on an Arctic island. Come back to visit both islands in 100 years and the resulting dogs will look VERY different. The dogs on the Arctic island will be large, thick coated, have more hair on their paws, and more hardy digestive systems. The tropical dogs will be smaller, have less fur, and have more sensitive digestive systems. Why? In the Acrtic island, the chihuahuas, chinese crested, papillons, and other small dogs would die within a few days. The Huskies, shepherds, labs, and collies would last longer and have a greater chance of passing on their genetic traits to offspring. On the tropical island, the opposite would occur. The heavy coated dogs would die of heat exposure, and the smaller dogs (with their favorable mass/surface area ratio) would live quite well and have the opportunity to pass on their traits to other generations.

Now, if you left those dogs alone for a million years on their respective islands, they might be different species. THAT is evolution.

Now, there are two types of evolution; convergent and divergent. The kind that made a man from a monkey (as you would describe it) is divergent. Take a population of 100 examples of a species. Let's say they are Goats. They are all grazing in a field when a huge earthquake comes along and splits the group right down the middle. 50 of them float away on an island that has heaved up into a mountain, while the other 50 are left on mainland at sea level. The mainland goats can eat what they want, or walk a few miles to get what they want. They are at sea level and have access to water from a stream, good food, the ability to find shelter, and migrate. The other 50 don't have fresh water so they have to start drinking sea water and eating fish because that is what the environment has given them. A fair number of them die from that diet, but the ones who have the genetics which make their stomachs a little more capable of dealing with that diet will survive and pass on those traits. Over successive generations, those traits get further honed and selected. After a long enough time, the environment has made two different species; the original species, and the new one on the island. Australia is a fine example of natural selection's best proof.

The other form of natural selection; convergent, happens when two species begin to fill the same niche. A niche is a biological term for an organism's "place" in the "circle of life." You have predators, scavengers, grazers, browsers, decomposers, etc. Let's say that you have two predators occupying the same area; like, bobcats and eagles. They both feed on the same critters and live in the same areas. Since they fill the same niche, the environment might select both of them for the same beneficial characteristics, but that is not to say that in a million years we'll have flying bobcat/eagles. What that means is that they will both be selected for things like better vision, intelligence, memory, physical endurance... but that doesn't mean they will become the same animal. The eagle can possess the same beneficial characteristics of the bobcat, but that in no way suggests they will start looking the same.

Its like buying a car. If you buy a chevy and your neighbor buys a dodge, and you both use it for the same purpose, you both put a certain stereo and other accessories in it to fine tune it to your environment, that doesn't mean that you have structurally made the cars any more alike. One is still a dodge and the other is still a chevy, but that doesn't mean they can't both fill the same niche for each of you.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 10:28 am
@curtis73,
curtis, I'm sure you have provided some interesting info on this subject, but can you please summarize your posts into a few paragraphs instead of the "book" form? I would personally appreciate it. Thx.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution? How?
  3. » Page 597
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/03/2021 at 09:46:55