Originally posted by FreakyKBH Sorry for jumping in so late in this game, but...
[b]So how do we get the enormous genetic diversity we see today? Exactly what "enormous" diversity? Biologically, there is but one classification for human beings: homo sapiens sapiens. Unless there is another classification, the biblical account of first Adam and then Noah as progenitors fits the evidence of what we see today.[/b]
Nearly 7 billion genetically unique individuals on the planet and Freaky tries to downplay genetic diversity. I've heard it all now!
Originally posted by jaywill So here's a discussion on possible alternatives to macro evolution. (Who can argue that change takes place in living organisms?)
Well, I would like to see more research in the area of sudden alterations of living things. Obviously, there are some animals which use to live and no longer live.
I would like to see more theoretical exploration in th ...[text shortened]...
Maybe He's amused that man can't completely put it all together. (Perish the thought !!)
Why do you believe that "sudden changes" are required?
Originally posted by whodey Science points to the Big Bang as the beginning of time and known matter. Therefore you must take a leap of faith beyond scientific fact to speculate as to where it all came from. There is no question it has a source, it is merely a question of what source.
This is an obvious non sequiter. If the BB was the origin of EVERYTHING, then there is NO REQUIREMENT for any precursor. Logic, my good man.
Originally posted by whodey Don't forget the atheist Bible.
Abiogenesis 1:1 In the beginning nothing was created and that which was not created simply always was. And that which was, simply burst out into nothingness. And that which was which burst out from an unkown force began to create life by an unknown force. Then the same unknown force that created life then began to help th ...[text shortened]... !!!!
BTW I prefer a nice juicy jam sandwich over random indifference any day. Bon appetite!
Whoever said there was any "force"? That's the domain of theists. Us athiests merely believe in chance.
Originally posted by whodey Who says I reject radioactive dating? Who says the Biblical account is heretical to such data? Only if you buy into the notion that a day in God's time equals a day in mans time would you assume such a notion as in the creation story in Genesis. We all know time is relative to the observer and Biblically God says a day to him as is a thousand years to us. ...[text shortened]... u see, much is assumed from the Genesis account from both its opponents and from its defenders.
I didn't say you did reject it. However many people do.
Originally posted by whodey Don't forget the atheist Bible.
Abiogenesis 1:1 In the beginning nothing was created and that which was not created simply always was. And that which was, simply burst out into nothingness. And that which was which burst out from an unkown force began to create life by an unknown force. Then the same unknown force that created life then began to help th ...[text shortened]... !!!!
BTW I prefer a nice juicy jam sandwich over random indifference any day. Bon appetite!
Are you ignorant or intentionally distorting abiogenesis theory?
Originally posted by dj2becker Once you start to understand all the underlying assumptions of radiometric dating, it is a totally different kettle of fish.
Assumptions 2 and 3 can be shown to be true for a particular sample by finding agreement between that sample and multiple other samples using different isotopes.
Assumption 1 is utter crap. The "expert" cited on that page is talking crap. Well written crap but still crap.
And you in the past have done worse. You've claimed that different atmosphere makeups could change the decay rate. Completely wrong. You've claimed that sea water would change the decay rate. Utterly false. You've attempted to claim pretty much anything and everything and time after time you've been shown to be talking out of your ass.
I love it! I check back in on the "Alternatives to Evolution" thread hoping to find some alternatives. When I last visited the theists had been oddly silent. Now I return to find all my favorite fundies posting up a storm. But where oh where are the alternative mechanisms? Is it simply "goddunnit and nothingmore" as some atheists originally claimed it would be?
All I see are a bunch of zealots who can't comment upon a biology question unless it is somehow related to attacking evolution (at which point there become experts!). Your responses are almost Pavlovian. It's both amazing and pitiful.
Originally posted by telerion I love it! I check back in on the "Alternatives to Evolution" thread hoping to find some alternatives. When I last visited the theists had been oddly silent. Now I return to find all my favorite fundies posting up a storm. But where oh where are the alternative mechanisms? Is it simply "goddunnit and nothingmore" as some atheists originally claimed it ...[text shortened]... re become experts!). Your responses are almost Pavlovian. It's both amazing and pitiful.
It was never a contest of mechanisms telerion, I have been debating
with you for how long? I acknowledge small changes, we can call that
evolution if you like, if that makes you happy. The debate is about
what was the starting point like, how much change can a be done
through these small changes, and so on.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJay It was never a contest of mechanisms telerion, I have been debating
with you for how long? I acknowledge small changes, we can call that
evolution if you like, if that makes you happy. The debate is about
what was the starting point like, how much change can a be done
through these small changes, and so on.
Kelly
No actually this thread is about seeing if a plausible alternative to Evolution exists. No one has presented one yet. Perhaps you'd like to give it a go.
Originally posted by whodey Don't forget the atheist Bible.
Abiogenesis 1:1 In the beginning nothing was created and that which was not created simply always was. And that which was, simply burst out into nothingness. And that which was which burst out from an unkown force began to create life by an unknown force. Then the same unknown force that created life then began to help th ...[text shortened]... !!!!
BTW I prefer a nice juicy jam sandwich over random indifference any day. Bon appetite!
Here's where you've completely ballsed up your attempt at a bit of humour at the expense of atheists.
An atheist bible?
That's the most hilarious oxymoron I've ever heard.
Atheists DON'T accept that one book (or set of books) explains everything without error. Atheists don't pray to anything known or unknown.
And just what are you talking about with respect to an unknown force? Your projecting your infantile need to have a God to explain everything that you've mistaken this for what scientists do.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Originally posted by XanthosNZ No actually this thread is about seeing if a plausible alternative to Evolution exists. No one has presented one yet. Perhaps you'd like to give it a go.
I believe it to be true, but in a limited fashion.
Kelly
Originally posted by amannion Here's where you've completely ballsed up your attempt at a bit of humour at the expense of atheists.
An atheist bible?
That's the most hilarious oxymoron I've ever heard.
Atheists DON'T accept that one book (or set of books) explains everything without error. Atheists don't pray to anything known or unknown.
And just what are you talking about with r ...[text shortened]... lain everything that you've mistaken this for what scientists do.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
You know its funny, I don't see you up in arms talking about how my beliefs were belittled by the previous post that sparked the post to which you are protesting. I say if you can't take it don't dish it out. If you do dish it out and can't take it you are then
Wrong
Wrong
Wrong
Originally posted by whodey You know its funny, I don't see you up in arms talking about how my beliefs were belittled by the previous post that sparked the post to which you are protesting. I say if you can't take it don't dish it out. If you do dish it out and can't take it you are then
Wrong
Wrong
Wrong
Didn't read the post whodey, but do I need to?
It doesn't take much to belittle your beliefs let's face it.
Originally posted by scottishinnz This is an obvious non sequiter. If the BB was the origin of EVERYTHING, then there is NO REQUIREMENT for any precursor. Logic, my good man.
No requirment for any precursor? How can an entity of any kind have no requirement for a precursor? Can you provide an example? That is of coarse if you think that the BB was the origin of everything.
Alternatives to Evolution
28 Oct '06 22:54
Back to Top