Originally posted by Barts Can you give us your definitions of adaptation and evolution ?
An adaptation in biology is a trait with a current functional role in the
life history of an organism that is maintained and changed by means of
natural selection.
Evolution in biology is the belief that all forms of life developed from
a common ancestral living cell into the more complex life forms we see
today by natural selection.
P.S. Adaptaion happens. Evolution is only belief that it happens or
that it has happened in the past.
Originally posted by RJHinds There are not any to read. 😏
Read the one i suggested. The come back to us, and then maybe you might be taken a little bit seriously. Until then, your views are nothing more than a fart in the wind.
Originally posted by Proper Knob Read the one i suggested. The come back to us, and then maybe you might be taken a little bit seriously. Until then, your views are nothing more than a fart in the wind.
From reading the introduction, as I told you before, I would be reading
more misinformation. I haven't deleted it off my computer yet. So
one day I might read more of it so I can tear it apart right on this forum.
😏
Originally posted by RJHinds From reading the introduction, as I told you before, I would be reading
more misinformation. I haven't deleted it off my computer yet. So
one day I might read more of it so I can tear it apart right on this forum.
😏
Originally posted by FabianFnas Using creationists rhetorics, are we?
"Yes, he was wrong, but he was right anyway."
Did you know it was the rhetorics of atheists and evolutionists that came up with the FSM? If you read about the FSM this only proofs that they couldn't come up with enough evidence for their own theory thus spend time in creating something else which even is more ridiculous.
Would I want to believe someone which has this type of intellect?
Originally posted by RJHinds There are not any to read. 😏
Are there any circumstances under which you would be willing to accept the basic tenants of the theory of evolution? If not, then nobody wants to hear your repetative BS. Thanx!
Originally posted by Hand of Hecate Are there any circumstances under which you would be willing to accept the basic tenants of the theory of evolution? If not, then nobody wants to hear your repetative BS. Thanx!
Only if the Holy Spirit would reveal to me that they are true. 😏
Originally posted by Hand of Hecate Are there any circumstances under which you would be willing to accept the basic tenants of the theory of evolution? If not, then nobody wants to hear your repetative BS. Thanx!
Originally posted by RJHinds But the Holy Bible says life forms were created and then reproduced
after its own kind. It say nothing about life forms evolving because
that didn't happen. 😏
The Bible also says that God created Adam and Eve before AND after all other living things. Apart from anything else, these sorts of blatant contradictions should clue you in to the fact that the Genesis account is not meant to be read literally. The important and relevant information we should glean from Genesis is that God is responsible for the universe, and that human beings are the signature of God upon His creation. There is really no need to commit yourself to a slavish literalism. Literalism is a modern phenomenon, something the early church would have been unfamiliar with, so its not like you'd be abandoning your faith by reexamining your interpretation of Genesis.
Originally posted by Nicksten Honestly, what are the basics?
Honestly, what are the basics?
1) Intrinsic increase in the number of individuals within a species
2) Competition for limited resources
3) Survival of the few
4) Individuals with more favorable characteristics, on average, fare better than others
5) The few who survive pass on their traits to their offspring
That's Darwin's basic evolutionary theory.
Mendel, of course, discovered genetics and we have since expanded our understanding of how genetic information is passed on from one generation to the next.
Originally posted by epiphinehas Literalism is a modern phenomenon, something the early church would have been unfamiliar with, so its not like you'd be abandoning your faith by reexamining your interpretation of Genesis.
But his faith is not based on early church tradition. It is based on a literal reading of the Bible. So yes, he would be abandoning his faith.
Originally posted by RJHinds Only if the Holy Spirit would reveal to me that they are true. 😏
Clearly He wouldn't do this by revealing Earthly tangible evidence of natural selection and species development would He? I would imaine that God would not want you to remain ignorant or he would not have equipped you with your rudmentary abilty to reason and explore the mysteries of the physical world.
Holes in the Theory of Evolution
11 Jan '12 13:081 edit
Back to Top