Creation AND Evolution

[imnotcrazy357]

If you design a machine to kill somebody, you are responsible for it.

If I desgined it, but didn't build it, then I am still responsible, what if it was a complex way of venting my anger.

This is getting off topic.

You could use doublethink.

Doublethink?

Radiometric dating, observing the rate of expansion of the universe, etc.

Note that all methods of radiometric dating (provided that they can be used over a long enough period) give almost identical answers as to the age of certain objects, etc.

Radiometric dating, as stated in another thread I believe, Is innacurate. It is completely subjective to the person doing the dating.

 

[Shredderbeam]

If I desgined it, but didn't build it, then I am still responsible, what if it was a complex way of venting my anger.

This is getting off topic.

True, but you still designed it.

Doublethink?

Coined by George Orwell in his book 1984, it means to hold two self-contradictory concepts at the same time, believing both, and denouncing the other as false.

Radiometric dating, as stated in another thread I believe, Is innacurate. It is completely subjective to the person doing the dating.

Wrong. Its results vary when you perform flawed tests, as was discussed in the other thread.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

True, but you still designed it.

Sof I designed a simple "death machine" left it at my school, and someone else took intiative to make it, it would be fault for designing it?

Coined by George Orwell in his book 1984, it means to hold two self-contradictory concepts at the same time, believing both, and denouncing the other as false.

understandable, I have felt this way before about things.

Wrong. Its results vary when you perform flawed tests, as was discussed in the other thread.

After the process is complete, you are left with these questions:

• How much of the "daughter"element did the sample originall contain?
  
• How much of the "parent" element entered or secaped the sample during the decay process?
  
• How much of the "daughter" element entered or escaped the sample during the decay process?

When asnwering these questions, it is completely subjective to your beliefs.

 

[EL17E]

There ARE first-hand, eye-witness accounts of evolution among animals. Over a few years a species of wild wolf was domesticated into modern dog through selective breeding. Simillar experiments have been done on many apes but the results were all disappointing. The breeded apes did develop more intelligent offspring, but they showed far less drastic changes in adaptation and unique physical state into that of humans unlike the wolves were into domesticated dogs. So evolution into humans was'nt really proved

 

[Shredderbeam]

Sof I designed a simple "death machine" left it at my school, and someone else took intiative to make it, it would be fault for designing it?

If you made it, and activated it, then you would be responsible. Unless there's another God?

After the process is complete, you are left with these questions:

• How much of the "daughter"element did the sample originall contain?
• How much of the "parent" element entered or secaped the sample during the decay process?
• How much of the "daughter" element entered or escaped the sample during the decay process?

When asnwering these questions, it is completely subjective to your beliefs.

1). A constant amount.
2). A constant amount.
3). None.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

There ARE first-hand, eye-witness accounts of evolution among animals. Over a few years a species of wild wolf was domesticated into modern dog through selective breeding. Simillar experiments have been done on many apes but the results were all disappointing. The breeded apes did develop more intelligent offspring, but they showed far less drastic changes in adaptation and unique physical state into that of humans unlike the wolves were into domesticated dogs. So evolution into humans was'nt really proved

Can you show proof of this experiment?

I do not deny evolution, nor natural selection. I deny the fact, that one species of animal, evolved into another species.

If you made it, and activated it, then you would be responsible. Unless there's another God?

Oh I was speaking in a literal sense.

I was not sure how this related into the fact of God, please disregard the last few things I said.

could we start again at: Because He knows everything, everything bad that happens to anything, is His fault? what makes it His fault, other then because He has knowledge of it happening.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Why would you deny that?

 

[imnotcrazy357]

Why would you deny that?

Because I do not believe that that happened.

 

[EL17E]

I saw this program earlier on the history channel. If you don't deny evolution, then why do you deny animals gradually changing into different species trough drastic adaptation? Is'nt that what evolution means?...

 

[Shredderbeam]

Because I do not believe that that happened.

All right, can you explain the fossil record, the genetic similarity of all species, and anatomical similarities?

 

[imnotcrazy357]

All right, can you explain the fossil record, the genetic similarity of all species, and anatomical similarities?

what about the fossil record?

what about genetic similarities of all species?

what about anatomical similarities?

 

[Shredderbeam]

what about the fossil record?

what about genetic similarities of all species?

what about anatomical similarities?

Those three things point to the common ancestry of all species.

 

[Macroman]

Why have some animals evolved and other not?

 

[Shredderbeam]

Basically, the pressures of natural selection, acting over the last few billion years.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

Those three things point to the common ancestry of all species.

Because three things point to common ancestry we must have common ancestors?

 

[1337_Byte]

Evolution is quite obviously true, species did not change the same for millions of years, they need to adapt to surroundings, and this is done through natural selection. The individuals in species with worse traits die, so only the ones with better ones can breed. If this doesn't occur, there is no other way adaptation could occur and many species would quickly go extinct and their would be major in balance. I also don't see how just because you believe in evolution you can't believe in god. I believe that god created the universe, but doesn't effect anything in it, the only explanation for how life developed is evolution.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

Evolution is quite obviously true, species did not change the same for millions of years, they need to adapt to surroundings, and this is done through natural selection. The individuals in species with worse traits die, so only the ones with better ones can breed. If this doesn't occur, there is no other way adaptation could occur and many species would quickly go extinct and their would be major in balance. I also don't see how just because you believe in evolution you can't believe in god. I believe that god created the universe, but doesn't effect anything in it, the only explanation for how life developed is evolution.

To believe in Evolution, you msut deny Christianity, or deny a specific part of the Bible. If you deny any part of the Bible, then you are not a true Christiant, because the entire Bible is to be believed as the Word of God.

So evolution is true because if I had a retardant son, and he died, natural selection is true, and evolution must be true, so that was an advancement in our species.

 

[TJ]

So evolution is true because if I had a retardant son, and he died, natural selection is true, and evolution must be true, so that was an advancement in our species.

hmm so if what your saying is what i think you are saying is, that natural selection is true, thus leading to evolution.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

hmm so if what your saying is what i think you are saying is, that natural selection is true, thus leading to evolution.

so because the retardant and ill-formed creatures of a species die, this proves evolution?

 

[TJ]

so because the retardant and ill-formed creatures of a species die, this proves evolution?

Um, yes. why would god kill animals that he created?

yes, natural selection goes along with evolution.