1
   

How can you not believe in evolution? Also ideas on Genesis

 
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Oct, 2006 06:48 pm
Eorl wrote:
You can't possibly split an atom because no knife could made sharp enough"


Hahahahahaha Smile

Out of context the joke is on you Twisted Evil

But what happens to the atoms of the bread I eat as it dissolves in my stomach?
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Oct, 2006 10:57 pm
Eorl wrote:
Rolling eyes won't do it, hep.

Michael Behe himself would be embarrassed by your ignorance of evolution. How can you possibly hope to dismiss something about which you understand so little?

If you said "You can't possibly split an atom because no knife could made sharp enough" you'd expect to be laughed at.....but because no church has decreed that nuclear science needs to be undermined, nobody is that silly. The only reason you make such a nonsense statement with such confidence is that an enormous number of people agree with it, and your church encourages it.

If the Roman Catholic Church itself has (eventually, grudgingly) admitted the fact of evolution, how dare you find the idea so ridiculous?



Michael Behe?

THE Michael Behe?????????

Shocked

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!










Oh yeah....

Who's Michael Behe again?

Well he's more than welcome to be embarrassed FOR me. I'm perfectly alright with that. Cool

So first of all Eorl I'm not even slightly embarrassed here.

Second of all at no point have I "dismissed" anything. Just because I say I think it's a load of crap doesn't mean I'm not willing to hear anything about it. I just may not agree in the end. But who knows... I could...

If I have questions about it I'll ask and even consider what I'm told... Maybe even do some research of my own if I'm THAT interested. :wink:

Third of all I don't have a church.

And last but not least... while I'm thinking about it...

Did you ever find the "scientific explanation" as to why a bluejay is blue?

Tehehe... Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 04:32 am
Hmmm... The linguistic explanation to why it is called a bluejay is probably that it is blue...

Evolution theories may be not entirey accurate, but we know evolution takes place, even though we cannot neccesarily describe it in detail.
0 Replies
 
rockpie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 04:46 am
i have nothing against evolution. the only thing in the bible that God makes as they are today is man. it says he made fish, birds, mammals, etc, but nowhere does it say he made a finch here, or a salmon there. what is to say that God didn't create that life at a basic level then bless it with the potential to evolve into the things we see around us. and as for the 7 days of creation, God is eternal, why do we assume that 1 of his days is just 24 hours? it could be a million years for all we know, he is not bound by time as we are.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 05:07 am
Well, the bible doesn't really say that he made man then made the woman from man's ribs. That's a biased translation. What it says originally is that God created the first living creature and split it in two. That is consistent with the modern term cytogenesis.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 12:42 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
Hmmm... The linguistic explanation to why it is called a bluejay is probably that it is blue...

Evolution theories may be not entirey accurate, but we know evolution takes place, even though we cannot neccesarily describe it in detail.


Ummm that's all well and good Cyracuz, however that's not my question. Smile My question is WHY is a bluejay blue and not say... purple. Not what causes it to be blue but WHY blue and not some other color.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 12:56 pm
You're awful cute when you're bein' feisty (if I may say so), heph.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 01:20 pm
Why... thank you snood. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 01:58 pm
heph

I don't understand the question.

Why are you not a man? Why am I not a woman?
0 Replies
 
megamanXplosion
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 02:07 pm
Blue Jays aren't really blue. It is the reflected wavelengths of light that make them look blue. You can grind some features up and not get a blue powder. You can also hold the features up between you and a light source and the blue will go away. Small particles in the feathers cause that refraction of light. In many respects, the explanation for why a blue jay is blue is similar to why the sky is blue: it is all a trick of light.

Parrots aren't really green either. They also have small particles like the blue jays. They have a layer of particles that scatter blue and a layer of particles that scatter yellow, causing them to look green.

I know that is not the kind of answer you're looking for. I just felt like talking a little bit Wink

As for your actual question of why they've come to be the way they are, I have no idea. I did a search on Google Scholar and I kept being fed a bunch of links to research concerning warning coloration in insects that effected the behavior of blue jays and how the blue jays come to realize certain colors are bad to for their diets. (One actually shown a picture of a Blue Jay throwing up the insect, lol.) The question you've posed is an interesting one though. Considering that I see bluejays all the time, I'm surprised I've never thought about the question before. Now the question is going to bug the crap out of me Razz

If anyone knows the answer, we would appreciate it if you enlighten us Smile
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 02:16 pm
It is blue becuase it can be. We are the way we are because we can be. The seamless interplay of forces create a delicate balance in which everything recieves it's attributes from it's own potential and the limits set by it's environment.
0 Replies
 
megamanXplosion
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 02:21 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
It is blue becuase it can be. We are the way we are because we can be. The seamless interplay of forces create a delicate balance in which everything recieves it's attributes from it's own potential and the limits set by it's environment.


When you find an actual answer to Hep's question, feel free to share it. I'm sure Hep and I both agree that the response quoted above does not answer Hep's question.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 02:23 pm
You mean "Why is a bluejay blue?". That question?

It strikes me as a useless question in the same category as "why is water wet".
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 02:25 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
You mean "Why is a bluejay blue?". That question?

It strikes me as a useless question in the same category as "why is water wet".


Are they asking why a bluejay would have evolved to be blue and not purple instead?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 05:11 pm
As far as I can tell.

The only answer I can come up with is obvious: It was practical. This worked, so this bird got to pass on it's genes. If purple was a more suited color, then they'd be purple. Obvious.
0 Replies
 
megamanXplosion
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 05:25 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
As far as I can tell.

The only answer I can come up with is obvious: It was practical. This worked, so this bird got to pass on it's genes. If purple was a more suited color, then they'd be purple. Obvious.


Duh.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 05:45 pm
hephzibah wrote:
I know I've asked this before but I just have to ask it again... if we "evolved" from say... gorilla's why are there still gorilla's? Doesn't "evolving" involve being evolved from one thing to something different? Therefore the original "thing" would no longer exist...

Oh wait... I know! We evolved from dinosaurs!! That's it! That's why they no longer exist!


This was the question you asked first, before the distracting bluejay question (which is actually a good question to be asking, especially when compared to this question above)

Do you have a link to the first time you asked about the bluejay, hep?

I seem to remember posting a very good site that discussed bird colouration and adaptation....which I doubt you spent much time reading.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 05:57 pm
heph wrote:
if we "evolved" from say... gorilla's why are there still gorilla's? Doesn't "evolving" involve being evolved from one thing to something different? Therefore the original "thing" would no longer exist...


Evolution is a matter of mutations. If one gorilla among many has a mutation that gives it an edge, and is able to pass on that mutation genetically, evolution has happened. But that doesn't mean that all the 'old model' gorillas just fade away. If they can sustain their existence there will only be two species of gorilla rather than one.

But I suspect that the evolution of man has gone on for far longer than the evolution of gorilla. At one time man might have looked a lot like gorilla does today. At that time gorilla may have looked like something else entirely.

Human is the oldest form of primate we know of, and therefore the most advanced.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 11:38 pm
Cyracuz wrote:
heph

I don't understand the question.

Why are you not a man? Why am I not a woman?


It's really not that difficult a question to understand though. The key word is WHY.

megamanXplosion wrote:
Blue Jays aren't really blue. It is the reflected wavelengths of light that make them look blue. You can grind some features up and not get a blue powder. You can also hold the features up between you and a light source and the blue will go away. Small particles in the feathers cause that refraction of light. In many respects, the explanation for why a blue jay is blue is similar to why the sky is blue: it is all a trick of light.

Parrots aren't really green either. They also have small particles like the blue jays. They have a layer of particles that scatter blue and a layer of particles that scatter yellow, causing them to look green.

I know that is not the kind of answer you're looking for. I just felt like talking a little bit Wink

As for your actual question of why they've come to be the way they are, I have no idea. I did a search on Google Scholar and I kept being fed a bunch of links to research concerning warning coloration in insects that effected the behavior of blue jays and how the blue jays come to realize certain colors are bad to for their diets. (One actually shown a picture of a Blue Jay throwing up the insect, lol.) The question you've posed is an interesting one though. Considering that I see bluejays all the time, I'm surprised I've never thought about the question before. Now the question is going to bug the crap out of me Razz

If anyone knows the answer, we would appreciate it if you enlighten us Smile


Now THAT... was an awesome answer! Had nothing to do with the question but wow that was some interesting stuff mega! Smile

Cyracuz wrote:
It is blue becuase it can be. We are the way we are because we can be. The seamless interplay of forces create a delicate balance in which everything recieves it's attributes from it's own potential and the limits set by it's environment.


Errrr... That answer equates to the value of the common "christian" answer of... "well... because I believe in faith..."

megamanXplosion wrote:
When you find an actual answer to Hep's question, feel free to share it. I'm sure Hep and I both agree that the response quoted above does not answer Hep's question.


Yep we sure do. Very Happy

Cyracuz wrote:
You mean "Why is a bluejay blue?". That question?

It strikes me as a useless question in the same category as "why is water wet".


Ummm well... Cyracuz... it's not useless really. It's actually a very valid question I think.

maporsche wrote:
Are they asking why a bluejay would have evolved to be blue and not purple instead?


I'm not asking anything about "evolving" of any sort at this point. I am simply asking WHY. Science can explain how we "evolved" right? So surely it can answer as simple a question as this don't you think?

Cyracuz wrote:
As far as I can tell.

The only answer I can come up with is obvious: It was practical. This worked, so this bird got to pass on it's genes. If purple was a more suited color, then they'd be purple. Obvious.


It was practical to whom? Because for it to be "practical" wouldn't there have needed to be someone to whom it was "practical" to make the bluejay blue? And if it was practical to "someone"... well who was that someone? Who made that decision?

Could it be...


Perhaps...



God?


Eorl wrote:
This was the question you asked first, before the distracting bluejay question (which is actually a good question to be asking, especially when compared to this question above)

Do you have a link to the first time you asked about the bluejay, hep?

I seem to remember posting a very good site that discussed bird colouration and adaptation....which I doubt you spent much time reading.


Here's your link Eorl:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=78974&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

And here's YOUR words to my question last time:

Eorl wrote:

There is a very good reason why bluejays are blue and science can answer the question. Not how....why.

You seem to have this wilful determination to dismiss science, yet you seem to understand so little about it. Why is that?


To which you never replied again.

*sigh*

It's not a distraction Eorl. I'm trying to prove a point here. Did you get it yet?

Well I really would like to know why a bluejay is blue though. Cool


Cyracuz wrote:
Evolution is a matter of mutations. If one gorilla among many has a mutation that gives it an edge, and is able to pass on that mutation genetically, evolution has happened. But that doesn't mean that all the 'old model' gorillas just fade away. If they can sustain their existence there will only be two species of gorilla rather than one.

But I suspect that the evolution of man has gone on for far longer than the evolution of gorilla. At one time man might have looked a lot like gorilla does today. At that time gorilla may have looked like something else entirely.

Human is the oldest form of primate we know of, and therefore the most advanced.


If human is the oldest form of primate, did the gorilla then evolve from us? Does science have this backwards?
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Oct, 2006 11:58 pm
I know the point you're trying to prove, and failing to do so.

You want to prove that science cannot answer a question like "why is a bluejay blue", and that the reason must therefore be "magic" or a god if you wish, simply because you lack the answer.

That is the whole reason faith in gods developed in the first place. In every instance where the lack of an obvious answer exists, a god was assumed to be the cause. Half of the planet still thinks gods are creating the weather, despite meteorological science.

Your point fails because science can answer the question of why a bluejay is blue. If you wanted to know the answer you would have tracked down the book I posted.

Your point also fails because even if science did not have the answer, it would prove absolutely nothing about what you presume to be the answer...your magical being's super powers.

As for Gorillas and Humans, stop dumbing things down. Both exist today and both had a common ancestral species at some point. So did Humans and Mice.

from CNN:
Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.

"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."

The mouse is the only mammal, after the human, whose genome has been sequenced. The rodent's genetic sequence was published in this week's edition of Nature Magazine.


Why do you imagine your god gave us genes for a tail, and then switched it off?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/16/2024 at 03:44:39